what are you seeing around the world? how can we help you with the increase in costs you're seeing, and how have your cash-based interventions help in some ways circumvent the operating costs of delivering millions of tons of food around the world? mr. beasley: i think the greater flexibility we can get from the united states government which will help, in my opinion, sway european nations and other nations to give us greater flexibility how we can use our funds, different modalities. i know when senator corker -- when i arrived in this role, senator corker used to really hit me hard about cash-based transfers and at first i wasn't quite so sure. once i realized the mechanisms and the assistance we had in place and seeing the support we did have from the democrats and republicans in the united states congress, we've actually moved our cash-based system, senator, to now over $2 billion. so like in places in ukraine where there is some degree of -- >> and we're leaving this to keep our more than 40-year commitment to live coverage of congress.

the house is about to gavel back in. today, lawmakers will resume debate to fund the government for the next year. this is live house kofrm here on c-span. -- coverage here on c-span. whol hearts are opened and all desires are known and no secrets are hidden, we lay before you the concerns of our hearts for peace in this world and the desires we have that ukraine would be liberated from the oppression they now endure. nothing in all of creation is concealed from your sight. we ask, then, that you expose tyranny and reveal its true motive of power and self-promotion. uncover the traitors to freedom and enemies of sovereignty and convict them of their deceit. unmask those who scheme for their own interests at the expense of their own country and have them answer for their transgressions.

may all who fail to contribute to the common good, all those who thwart the ideals of freedom and democracy in ukraine be laid bear before you and may your judgment be swift. call us all to account for our deeds, things done and left undone, the overt and contrierved, the noble and the -- contrierved -- contrived, the mobile and malicious. and align our nations and the world to your perfect will to your creation. be merciful to us and in your holy name we pray. amen. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has examined the journal of the last day's proceedings and announces to the house his approval thereof. pursuant to clause 1, rule 1, the journal stands approved. the pledge of allegiance will be led by the gentlewoman from michigan, ms. tlaib.

ms. tlaib: thank and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under god, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. the speaker pro tempore: the chair will entertain up to 15 requests for one-minute speeches on each side of the aisle. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from michigan seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: so ordered. ms. tlaib: today i want to celebrate the exceptional leadership and commitment to service by phyllis j. edwards who i warmly refer to as director edwards. she has dedicated her work to protect and advocate for the underrepresented communities within michigan's 13 district strong.

specifically our senior citizens in detroit. director edwards was the executive director of bridging communities in southwest detroit for over a decade and prior to that she was a social service program manager for more than 30 years within the wayne county department of health and human services. her work and proactive community involvement has made an immensible impact on the lives of countless residents. as a long time detroit resident, her efforts to improve the quality of life for our seniors demonstrated her love and commitment and passion for community-based work. please join me recognizing her many outstanding contributions to michigan's 13 district strong as we wish her well on the next chapter of her life. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recog recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. lamalfa: mr. speaker, with the all issues people are dealing with, inflation, high

cost of everything, now we have the securities and exchange commission proposed rule requiring small privately run family farms to produce huge volumes of climate related information to be able to then sell their products to public companies. which is going to be nearly impossible for small farms. inflation being driven by s.e.c. new retion. farmers are -- regs. farmers are facing an assault of increase and rises of input costs. when world leaders are warning of coming food shortages, don't make it harder for farmers to do their jobs and grow food for people to use. small family farms are struggling financially to keep their operations up and running. they don't have the funds to hire a full-scale environmental compliance department to meet the s.e.c.'s ridiculous proposed demands. farmers are producing more food and fiber with less inputs than ever before. the s.e.c. needs to think about the unintended catastrophic consequences this new rule will

have on our nation's farmers and in turn on our food supply, which is already going to be short. we need to fight together in a bipartisan effort to combat this blatant government overreach. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new york seek recognition? mr. higgins: unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. higgins: madam speaker, under the affordable care act contraception is covered as essential benefit recognizing its importance to overall health care. yet this essential health component is one of the many rights under attack by an extreme politicized supreme court. congress must act now to protect the fundamental -- freedom of individuals to make their own decisions about reproductive health and family planning. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the right to contraceptive act -- contraception act and ensure this fundamental health care benefit isn't the latest right stolen from the millions of americans who rely on it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for

what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? mr. rose: i seek unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. rose: madam speaker, inflation is at the highest rate it has been since 1981. meanwhile, congressional democrats are spending this week passing a funding bill full of liberal initiatives that will fan the flames of the already red hot inflation tennesseans are facing due to democrats' reckless spending. when will enough be enough? madam speaker, democrats' socialist spending spree includes an overall 14% increase in domestic funding. a 20% increase in the environmental protection agency. and a 10% increase to the f.d.a., the same department that failed to quickly address the baby formula shortage when we all knew it was coming. borrowing more money from china, throwing it out the door, and

forcing our grandchildren to pay it back only creates more problems not solve them. we need to return to our commonsense roots and end this inflationary spending now. i urge my colleagues to join me in voting no. thank you. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recog recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. ruiz: i rise today to celebrate the house passage of my bill, the desert sage utah wellness center access improvement act which is now on its way to the president's desk. this much needed legislation will bring a paid access road -- paveed access road to the desert center. it is the only operational indian health service youth treatment center in the entire state. it is the only place in california where native youth can receive culturally relevant mental health care and substance

use disorder treatment. yet to get to the center patients and staff have to traverse a dirt road that often cracks in the heat and washes out in the rain and hinders deliveries and services. as a physician i know how crucial culturally based care is to the health and well-being of our communities. that is why i advocated for the construction of desert sage since day one, and why i secured funding for its completion in 2016 and why now i'm working to deliver safe, reliable access to this facility. i urge president biden to sign this into law immediately to help pave the road worthy of the dignity of the people at desert sage youth wellness center. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from new york seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, madam speaker. i rise today to bring attention to the fact that the world trade center health program is facing

a looming deficit of $3 billion. and in a few weeks we are going to be commemorating the 21-year anniversary of 9/11. the horrific terrorist attacks, where we told firefighters, police officers, families who lost loved ones, and those who today are battling cancers and illness that is we would never forget and that we would stand by them and give them what they needed in their journey in this great country. ms. malliotakis: they gave so selflessly. they put their lives on the line and so many lost their life on that dreadful day. but to this day we still have heroes who are battling these illnesses. we should not be leaving this session. we should not be leaving next week without passing this incredibly important bill. h.r. 4965, the 9/11 responder and survivor health funding

correction act. this bill has bipartisan support. i'm proud to be a prime sponsor of this bill. but we must call on the speaker of the house to bring this to the floor before we leave next week. we owe it to those who put their life on the line for our city and great country. thank you. pursuant to house resolution 432 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for further

consideration of h.r. 8294. would the -- the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, kindly take the chair. the chair: the house is in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for the further consideration of h.r. 8294, which the clerk will report the title. the clerk: a bill making -- making appropriations for the departments of transportation and housing and urban development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2023, and for other purposes. the chair: when the committee of the whole rose on tuesday, july 19, 2022, the sixth set of en bloc amendments offered by the gentlewoman from connecticut, ms. delauro, had been disposed of.

for what purpose does the gentlewoman from connecticut seek recognition? ms. delauro: mr. chair, pursuant to house resolution 1232, i offer amendments en bloc. the chair: the clerk will designated the amendments en bloc. the clerk: en bloc number 7 consisting of amendments numbered 104, 106, 107, 113, 115, 116, 123, 125, 131, 141, 142, 152, 1 a 3, 155, 156, 158, 159, 161, 164, 172, 174, 180, 181, 182, 186, 187, 188, 189, and 190 printed in part a of house report number 117-420 offered by ms. delauro of connecticut. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 1232, the gentlewoman from connecticut, ms. delauro, and the gentleman from florida, mr. diaz-balart, each will control 15 minutes.

the chair recognizes the the gentlewoman from connecticut. ms. delauro: mr. chair, i yield myself such time as i may consume. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. delauro: the bipartisan en bloc amendment includes 29 proposals offered by my democratic and republican colleagues. this bipartisan amendment will make changes to the financial services bill, the interior bill, and the military construction bill. for example, for the financial services bill the amendment will increase funding for entrepreneurial development programs by $6.7 million. increase funding for the truman foundation. and provide $35 million to -- $5 million to help prevent fentanyl overdoses. for interior the amendment will enhance activities for the preservation of historically black colleges and universities and civil rights landmarks. for military construction, the amendment will provide $1 million for grants to states and tribal organizations in establishing veterans cemeteries and support increased access to

medical care for veterans. these are bipartisan proposals that we can all support and i urge my colleagues to support this amendment. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from florida is recognized. mr. diaz-balart: i reserve. the chair: the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from connecticut. ms. delauro: mr. chair, i yield two minutes to the gentlewoman from virginia, ms. spanberger. the chair: the gentlewoman from virginia is recognized for two minutes. ms. spanberger: mr. speaker, i stand in support of my amendment to increase funding for suicide prevention coordinators at the v.a. and i thank the chairwoman for her advocacy and good work on the larger bill. last saturday the new 988 national suicide prevention lifeline launched. now veterans in crisis can reach the veterans crisis line by calling 988 and pressing 1.

this new number will allow more individuals to access help when they need it the most. and it will save lives. due to this transition the v.a. anticipates and crease in call volume. as much as 2.5 times higher than last year. and we need to make sure that there are enough professionals in place at the v.a. to handle the uptick in caseload. . they receive referrals from house calls providing follow-up care and connecting them with resources within their communities. 988 is an important step in providing mental health care to veterans in crisis. it is our duty to make sure there are suicide coordinateors in place. i urge my colleagues to join me in supporting the americans who

represent the very best of our country and ensuring the success of the new 988 suicide prevention lifeline to all those who need it. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: h. the chair: the the gentlewoman from texas is recognized. the chair: the gentlewoman from connecticut is recognized. ms. delauro: we are prepared to close -- ms. granger: i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman from connecticut. this en bloc will make this package stronger and meet the needs of the people that we are -- who have entrusted in us their faith. i yield back. the chair: the question is on

the amendments en bloc offered by the gentlewoman from connecticut. those in favor, say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the en bloc amendments are agreed to. ms. granger: i ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendments en bloc offered by the gentlewoman from connecticut will be postponed. it is now in order to consider amendment number 137 printed in part a of house report 117-420. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from michigan seek recognition? ms. tlaib: i have an amendment at the desk. the clerk: amendment number 137 printed in house report 117-420.

the chair: pursuant to house resolution 1232, the gentlewoman from michigan and a member opposed each will control five minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from michigan. ms. tlaib: i thank chair mcgovern and chairman meeks working with me and their leadership throughout this process. i would like to thank the incredible congresswoman lee to speak in support of this critical policy change and congressman crawford who submitted this change to the appropriations bill in 2017 and has been a great advocate. this is an amendment that is critical and builds on efforts by bipartisan members of the house and senate and the farm industry leaders across the country. as cubans face forcing them to

wait in lines in hopes of finding food. my amendment, our amendment, would provide temporary relief to them ands you farm exporters by suspending of prohibiting and stepping credit to cuban food buyers. this amendment makes sense for two reasons. the cuban people are contending with significant food shortages by allowing cuban importers to buy food products on credit. we can ease and build goodwill. it is the most humane we can do right now. the amendment would help american ag producers by removing trade barriers that put them at a competitive disadvantage with countries like china and vietnam. for home state this amendment opens up a new market of 11

million people for our farmers and for their exports. i know michigan's director of ag noted that our state farmers see great opportunities for products like beans and poultry that are major staples. this is good for our cuban people and our american farmers and please is support this amendment. and i reserve. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? mr. diaz-balart: let's be clear, this is not the time to provide unilateral concessions to a designated state sponsor of terrorism. this amendment is a bailout for the anti-american terrorist regime of cuba that oppresses the cuban people and undermines

u.s. national security and terrorist groups. the law allows for unlimited quantities food and medicine. that's already allowed to be sent and to be sold to cuba. what we must not do is allow the american taxpayers have them on the hook to subsidize the cuban terrorist regime. this is not the time to bail out an enemy of the united states which harbors fugitives from u.s. justice and allows russian spy ships to dock in its waters that oppresses the cuban people and imprisoning children for speaking out for freedom. this amendment would ensure that american farmers are not paid. the cuban regime doesn't pay back its debts. this would put the american

taxpayer on the hook to help the cuban regime. a vote against this amendment is a vote for freedom. a vote against this amendment is a vote for the american national security interests and a vote against this amendment is a vote for human rights and freedom for the cuban people. i reserve. the chair: the gentleman from florida reserves. ms. tlaib: it is very important to note this is identical to a bipartisan republic cap-led amendment submitted a few years ago. i yield two minutes to the chair. the chair: the gentlewoman is recognized. ms. delauro: i rise in support of the amendment offered. our nation policy towards cuba has proven to be ineffective and counterproductive. the biden administration has peeled back these restrictive policies and empower the cuban

people. and this amendment would further these efforts. this would lift long standing restrictions on the private financing of agricultural exports to cuba, which harm u.s. farmers and ranchers and their competitiveness. cuba imports $2 billion of agricultural exports per year. this would increase business for our nation's ranchers and farmers and would create jobs for american families. let me give you an example. in 2021, u.s. rice imp ports from vietnam, malaysia, 6 million. thailand, 51 million, pact, $41 million. we are costing american dollars while importing and could be

helping louisiana and alabama and i support the reforms that allow for better relationships with cuba and urge support for this amendment. and i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. ms. tlaib: how much time do i have? the chair: 1:15 remaining. ms. tlaib: the embargoes are not working. and i think my colleagues at least agree that there is no more premed reason to engage than to ease the suffering of the cuban people who are suffering from huge amounts of food shortage and there is trade happening now but in cash and would ahow the access to credit to do it in a way that farmers in michigan and across the country asking us to help them do more in exporting and address

the food shortages that help the cuban people. for those reasons, i urge my colleagues to vote yes on this amendment. and i reserve. the chair: the gentlewoman reserves. the gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: i yield one minute to the gentleman from south carolina. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. >> thank you to mario diaz-balart. pardon me, i was actually born in cuba. and i rise to oppose the fsgg amendment to provide assistance to cuba. this amendment is being pushed on the week after we commemorate the freedom of the pro-freedom protestors in cube cana. allow americans to invest in private companies within cuba, the regime fuels this to fund

their nonstop violation of human rights. she wants to extend another pipeline of cash to the regime to fund the murdering raping and scwailg of cuban people. if you believe in freedom and believe in democracy and social opportunity, i urge you to vote against this shameful and pathetic amendment. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman reserves. the gentlewoman from florida -- gentleman from florida. mr. diaz-balart: i yield to congresswoman wasserman schultz. ms. wasserman schultz: i thank the gentleman for yielding and compassion about this extremely important issue and i must rise in opposition to the

gentlewoman's amendment. while she has the best of intentions, i want to be practical. the reality is that the amendment will not a-eat the suffering of the cuban people and may exacerbate their pain by enriching a regime whose violence and repression keep the cruel grip on power. on a day in which we just heard from the first lady of ukraine who is experiencing what the butt of repression means from a brutal dictator, we certainly should not be caving to brutal dictatorship in the western hemisphere. it uses its resources to oppress its own people. the financial exports to cuba means it cannot benefit and its corrupt financial institutions

are not intertwined with american financial institutions. please you need to understand that this amendment allows u.s. persons to invest in cuban agricultural businesses even if those businesses are involved in trafficking in confiscated property, which is law and even if the businesses controlled by the government of cuba, cuban military or any other entity. it is inexplicable to me how we could allow that. and unlimited quantities of food, medicine and other basic necessities are permitted for sale and through humanitarian donations and the best way to lift up the cuban people is support their efforts for democratic reform and ask for release of detained children.

and i support liberty all over the world. i yield become. ms. tlaib: i'm prepared to close. the chair: is the gentleman from florida prepared to close? mr. diaz-balart: i would now yield one minute to the gentleman from tennessee. the chair: the gentleman has 30 seconds remaining. do you want to yield those 30 seconds? mr. diaz-balart: yes. the chair: the gentleman from tennessee. >> i rise in strong opposition, unlimited quantities of today and medicine are permitted in cuba and this would allow the exporting of agricultural products. a single company controls all agricultural imports. it is owned by the military and controlled by the enforces of the communist regime. tens of thousands of cubans sit

and tried to protest just a year ago and thousands of them are in prison, children imprisoned by this communist regime. i yield. the chair: the gentleman yields. the gentleman's time has expired. the gentlewoman from michigan is recognized. tab thaib ms. tlaib: the members in opposition are claiming to stand with the people of cuba. this is our opportunity to support the cuban people and help them right now and take this opportunity to vote yes we show the u.s. isn't the enemy of the cuban people during their time of need. at the same time we are helping our local farmers right here to be able to -- the chair: the gentlelady's time has expired. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas seek recognition? ms. granger: mr. chair, morph to strike the last word. the chair: gentlewoman is recognized for five minutes. ms. granger: i yield to the gentlewoman from new york, ms.

malliotakis. the chair: the gentlewoman from new york, ms. malliotakis, is recognized for -- is recognized. ms. malliotakis: thank you. i understand the plight of the cuban people. i would say the most in this chamber simply because i still have family that resides there. it is true these people are starving. they are struggling. but the reality is it is because of their own government. whatever you do, any business you conduct with cuba it will go to the regime. it never gets to the actual people. we know this because that is the way they have acted in the course of history, doing business with every other country in the world, and then taking it all for themselves while the people suffer. the people who want to fight for 15 on the other side of the aisle know the people of cuba make $15 a day. know that they are being treated inhumanely. that young children are put in jail. if you want to help the cuban people, side with them in their quest for freedom. side with them when they say they want to be liberated.

they want what we have in the united states. stop appeasing the regime. stop empowering the regime. and stand on the side of freedom and let's try to change this form of government for the better so those people can have true human rights and have freedoms that they deserve and not put in political prisoners simply for peacefully protesting like we are so privileged to do here in the united states. the chair: the gentlelady from texas. ms. granger: i yield to the gentleman from tennessee, mr. green, for one minute. the chair: the gentlelady can't yield blocks of time. but the gentleman is recognized. mr. green: thank you. look, the current regime controls all of the imports. if you give money to the regime, they keep the money. they don't trickle it down to the people. they are a current state sponsor of terrorism, close alley of putin's russia, the maduro regime in venezuela, the terrorist state of iran, and terrorist groups such as e.l.n.

they are currently participating in a military exercise in venezuela led by the russians. again, just one year ago thousands of cubans protested in the streets in every province in cuba demanding freedom. hundreds of them remain in prison including children, as i said, for daring to speak freely. yet today congress is debating whether to provide financing to their captors. a vote against this amendment is a pro-freedom, pro-america, and pro-human rights vote. i urge my colleagues to vote no on this amendment. thank you. i yield. the chair: the gentlewoman from texas. ms. granger: i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman from texas yields back. the question is on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from michigan, ms. tlaib. so many as are in favor say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it. the amendment is agreed to. the gentleman from florida.

mr. diaz-balart: ask for a recorded vote. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from michigan will be postponed. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from connecticut seek recognition? ms. delauro: pursuant to house resolution 1232, i offer amendments en bloc. the chair: the clerk will designate the amendments en bloc. the clerk: en bloc number 8 consisting of amendments numbered 183 and 184 printed in part a of house report number 117-420, offered by ms. delauro of connecticut. the chair: pursuant to house resolution 1232, the gentlewoman from connecticut, ms. delauro, and the gentleman from florida, mr. diaz-balart, each will control 515 minutes. the -- 15 minutes. the chair recognizes the gentlewoman from connecticut. ms. delauro: i yield to the gentleman from massachusetts,

mr. mcgovern, chair of the rules committee, five minutes. the chair: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for five minutes. mr. mcgovern: i thank chairwoman delauro for yielding the time. i rise in strong support of this bipartisan en bloc. which would eliminate funding for the v.a. asset and infrastructure review or air commission and transfer that $5 million to health care for homeless veterans program. let me be clear the recommendations advanced so far as part of the v.a.'s asset and infrastructure review process will lead to the closure or downsizing of nearly one third of this country's v.a. medical facilities and community-based outpatient clinics. i believe that is unacceptable. frankly a rotten way to treat veterans who have put their lives on the line for this country. this entire process is a backdoor way to cut services for veterans. i strongly urge my colleagues to support our veterans and vote yes on this amendment.

which has the support of a wide range of veterans advocacy organizations from across the political spectrum. this bipartisan amendment eliminates funding for a commission that would make it harder for veterans across america to get the care they deserve. the decision to recommend shutting down these v.a. health care facilities was based on totally flawed years old information. there are huge and unacceptable and inexcusable gaps in the data that was used to determine which facilities to shut down. the v.a. did not consider cases where hundreds of millions of dollars in new investments were made in facilities that were recommended for closure. it makes absolutely no sense. let me give you an example. one of the facilities that would be used is the leed's v.a. ved cal center in massachusetts. they said this facility should be closed because it needed nearly $200 million in upgrades.

what they didn't say was that the -- we already invested in those -- in the upgrades, $200 million in taxpayer money was already invested in this facility. and now they are recommending that it be should down? talk about ripping off the american taxpayer. the data that they use is from years ago. it's inexcusable. years ago. even the v.a. admits this. this is the definition of stupid. we might as well throw taxpayer money out the window if these flawed recommendations move forward. that's not to even mention the impact this commission would have on veterans. i held a listening session to hear how these recommendations would force many veterans in massachusetts and across the country. i have a map here, by the way, here is the map. the yellow is partial closures. the blue is total closure. all across the country. again, what we are finding out by objective observers, all this

is based on flawed outdated information. and is shutting these -- recommend they shut these facilities down. i'm learning here that this would literally force veterans to drive hours and hours and hours across state lines just to get basic care. i talked to people with ptsd who are like -- i'm not going to get care anymore if i have to drive across the state to another state to get care. older veterans who need nursing home care could have to move long distance from their support systems. this process so far is a complete and total slap in the face to these veterans. and we should not spend a penny more on a commission used to advance these awful cuts to veterans' services. if this moves for closure and consolidation of v.a. facilities are mandatory. but rimtions to build new facilities are subject to future appropriations. and are not guaranteed.

this appropriations committee will have to de decide whether o invest in the new facilities or consolidation of facilities. and that is why groups like the disabled american veterans, paralyzed veterans of america, and veterans of foreign war all support shutting down this commission right now. which is what this amendment would do. everyone knows that this process and this commission is broken. even v.a. secretary acknowledged it to congress telling the house veterans committee that the data is not up to speed in light of the pandemic. i'm also grateful that the chairman of the veterans committee here in the house, chairman takano, is supporting my amendment. i want to be clear that secretary mcdonough has done a great job in advocating for our veterans and working with my team and i to get to the bottom of some of these problems. but this process started because of a bill that congress passed even before he became secretary. i have spoken to him and i know

he, too, does not want to make it harder for veterans to get care. the solution is that congress needs to pass this amendment. even our nonpartisan congressional watchdog, the g.a.o., recently put out a report on this call -- incomplete information. the chair: the gentleman's time has expired. mr. mcgovern: may i ask for an additional two minutes? ms. delauro: two more minutes. the chair: the gentleman is recognized. mr. mcgovern: they put out a report called v.a. health care incomplete information hinders usefulness of market assessment for v.a. facility alignment. i ask unanimous consent to insert this into the record. mr. chair, moving forward with funding -- this fundamentally broken process would be a disservice to our veterans and jeopardize access to high quality specialized care they earned. this commission is being dismantled as we speak because their recommendations made had

been so bad. last month senate veterans' affairs committee john tester led a bipartisan group of 12 senators to announce they would not confirm more nominees to the commission. effectively ending this process once and for all. last week we had an amendment pass the ndaa to shut this down. why are we giving $5 million to a commission that may very well never exist and actively seeking to undermine our veterans -- care for our vettance and families -- veterans and families. we all believe in upgrading our v.a. system. use accurate information. there is no way that anybody here can tell me that the recommendations that are being put forward are based on accurate updated information. we are talking about our veterans who are now going through needless anxiety because of all these threats of closures. we need to do better. i urge my colleagues to vote yes on this en bloc. i reserve the balance of my time. the chair: the gentleman yield back.

the gentlewoman reserves. the gentlewoman from texas now controls the time. is recognized. ms. granger: i yield to the gentleman from georgia, mr. carter, for two minutes. the chair: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for two minute. mr. carter: i thank the lady for yielding. mr. speaker, i rise to speak on the need to provide certainty to blueberry producers who have been affected by freezes. we all know how difficult the job of a farmer can be. so much of their success is completely dependent on things outside of their control. this is particularly true when it comes to foul weather and disasters. farmers are at nature's mercy when it comes to these events. this past year a number of specialty crops across the country saw significant losses caused by freezes, particularly blueberries in my home state of georgia. the statewide freeze event this past march resulted in losses that exceeded $140 million. the last time a similar devastating freeze occurred congress was able to come together and provide funding for

those losses. i would like to thank the agriculture appropriations chairman, sanford bishop from georgia, for all his support already on this effort. the underlying bill includes $10 million for disasters occurring in 2022. and report language expressing congress' concerns about the impact of extreme weather events on blueberry products. however, that $10 million will not be enough to assist with the damages from disasters. chairman bishop has committed to continue working on this issue and to ensure adequate funding is available to blueberry and other producers affected by fleezs -- freezes in 2022. i hope we can continue to demonstrate congress' commitment to not only providing relief when farmers need it the most, but also fixing the larger issue for good. so we no longer need to return to this after future freezes. again i thank the lady for yielding. i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yield. the gentlelady reserves. the gentlewoman from connecticut is recognized.

ms. delauro: i yield five minutes to the gentlewoman from florida, the chair of the military construction and veterans' affairs subcommittee, ms. wasserman schultz. the chair: the gentlewoman from florida is recognized for five minutes. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, mr. chairman. i thank the gentlelady for yielding. with great respect for my friend from massachusetts, i rise in strong opposition to these amendments. i spend every day in my work as chair of the military construction and v.a. appropriations subcommittee protecting and improving the lives of our nation's veterans. i vigorously opposed privatization. so much so i voted against the mission act in which the air commission appeared as part of that law. because of my concern about sending veterans who might end up remaining permanently in community care. this en bloc contains two amendments to the milcon commission that would eliminate funding for the air commission at the department of veterans affairs. this independent commission was established by the mission act to develop recommendations to modernize and realign v.a. health facilities so we can best meet the needs of our nation's veterans. the reality is is that the v.a.

has different infrastructure needs today than it did decades ago. not only are most v.a. facilities over 60 years old, but the veteran population has also shifted geographically over time. the graft market assessments v.a. has developed and continue to fine-tune are essential to ensure that v.'s facility footprint meets veterans' needs where they are physically located today, not where most veterans were over we can't ignore these changes and meet the needs of our veterans and can't cancel the commission. we all care about veterans and since we do, we should be focused on making sure they have state-of-the-art facilities and are in a best position to serve them. this is to identify the current true needs of our veterans and the commission will review those assessments and make recommendations to the president and the congress. they come back to congress after

recommendations are made. the funding does not implement the recommendations. the funding in this bill does not implement the recommendations. we consistently talk about meeting the needs of our veterans making sure veterans have access to high quality care is a priority we all share. meet veterans where they meet today, we don't want to move toward privatized and there are facilities that are convenient or eligible by law to go into community care. i have the respect for sponsors of this amendment but as chair of the subcommittee response i will for the entire budget for the v.a., it is our responsibility to meet the needs of veterans across the entire country. we need to be careful about making rash decisions that have a long-term impact.

the amendments in this en bloc will do more harm than good. i will vote no and urge my colleagues to do the same and i yield back. the chair: gentlewoman yields back. the gentlewoman from texas. ms. granger: reserve. ms. delauro: i yield to the gentleman from ohio, for one minute. mr. ryan: i rise in support of this amendment, i represent ohio. and we have a number of v.a. clinics and facilities in rural areas across this country and one of hours is chlacoffy veteran center and said this

isn't serving the veterans. and 1400 are employed the facility is over 100 years old and serves 120,000 veterans in 17 counties and this is insane and think that is a good idea of all the waste and abuse in the united statesgovernment we are going to target a rural v.a. facility with a state that has 865,000 veterans. this is a wise amendment and i support the mcgovern amendment and i urge my colleagues to support it as well. the chair: the gentlewoman from texas. ms. granger: i reserve. the chair: the gentlewoman from connecticut. ms. delauro: i yield one minute to the gentleman from maine.

mr. golden: i represent the largest district east of the mississippi and home more than to 53,000. the v.a. facilities these are clinics in maine are at risk of being shut down if we don't our v.a. hospital would be moved from augusta and then moved to portland, maine, which is a long distance. and congress created this panel and tasked it with processing the recommendations to streamline v.a. facilities. if you live in a rural state, that is shorthand for closing and facilities are reducing access to health care services. i newsed legislation to eliminate the commission.

and dubbed that bill and i now support this amendment to defund the commission and transfer to a program. and this is in support of our nation's veterans. the chair: the gentlewoman from texas. ms. granger: reserve. ms. delauro: i yield one minute to the the gentlewoman from new jersey, ms. sherrill. ms. sherrill: i rise in support of the original intent commission, the v.a.'s infrastructure is aging and make sure they optimismize care for veterans. our vets need to receive the best possible care. the process was flawed from the beginning. in a report should earlier, the data recommendations relied on

was outdated and riddled with gaps. i received calls from veterans concerned about proposals to close one in paterson, new jersey. closing a central center would exacerbate this. the recommendations are the wrong way to go about this. i urge my colleagues to support the amendment and i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman yields. the gentleman from texas. ms. granger: i yield back. the chair: gentlewoman yields back. ms. delauro: i yield back. the chair: the gentlewoman yields. the question is on the amendments en bloc offered by the gentlewoman from connecticut. those in favor, say aye. those opposed, no. in the opinion of the chair, the ayes have it.

the en bloc amendments are agreed to. the gentleman from florida. >> request the yeas and nays. the chair: does the gentleman request a recorded vote? >> yes, the yeas and nays. the chair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, further proceedings on the amendments en bloc offered by the gentlewoman from connecticut, will be postponed. thechair: pursuant to clause 6 of rule 18, proceedings will resume on those amendments printed in part a of 117-420 on which further proceedings were postponed. amendments en bloc number 7 by

ms. delauro of connecticut. amendment number 137 by the gentlewoman from michigan and amendments en bloc number 8. the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum time for any electronic vote after the first vote in this series. the unfinished business is request for a recorded vote on amendments en bloc 7 printed in part a of house report 117-420 by the gentlewoman from connecticut, ms. delauro and further proceedings were postponed and the ayes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendment. the clerk: amendments number 104, 106, 107, 113, 115, 125, 136, 141, 142, 152, 155, 156, 158, 161, 164, 172, 174, 181,

182, 186, 188, 189 and 190 print i had in part a of house report 117-420. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of a recorded vote will rise. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a 15-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman ms. wasserman schultz: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. crist of florida, i inform the house that mr. crist will vote yea on amendments en bloc 7.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? >> mr. chair, as the member designated by mr. joe wilson from south carolina, i inform the house that mr. wilson will vote yea on en bloc 7.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? mr. fleischmann: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. palazzo of mississippi, and mrs. walorski of indiana, i inform the house that mr. palazzo and mrs. walorski will vote yea on en bloc number 7. thank you.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. evans: mr. chairman, as the member designated by mr. lawson, he votes yes on h.r. 8294.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. takano: mr. speaker -- mr. chairman, as the member designated by representatives -- chairwoman maxine waters and michael san nicolas, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on amendments en bloc number 7.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. keller: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. smucker from pennsylvania, i inform the house that mr. smucker will vote yes on amendments en bloc number 7. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> mr. chairman, as the member designated by mr. gallego, i inform the house that mr. gallego will vote yea on amendments en bloc number 7. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? mr. bishop: mr. chair, as the member designated by mr. bennie thompson of mississippi, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. thompson will vote yes on en bloc number 7. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlelady from illinois seek recognition?

ms. kelly: thank you, mr. speaker. as the member designated by ms. val demings of florida and -- mrs. val demings of florida and mr. kahele of hawaii, i inform the house that they will vote yes on amendments en bloc number 7.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pallone: mr. chair, as the member designated by mr. albio sires and mrs. ann kirkpatrick, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on amendments en bloc number 7.

the chair: for what purpose does gentlelady new hampshire seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. pingree, ms. meng,

ms. stevens and ms. leger fernandez, these members will vote yes on amendments en bloc 7.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. katko of new york, i inform the house that mr. katko will vote yes on en bloc 7. the chair: for what purpose does gentlelady texas seek

recognition? ms. garcia: as the member designated by ms. escobar will vote yes on amendments en bloc 7. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? >> as the member designated by lowey gohmert and carter. they will vote yes.

and as the member designated by mr. gosar, i inform the house he will vote no on en bloc 7.

the chair: for what purpose does gentlelady california seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. salazar of florida, i inform the house that ms. salazar will vote yea on en bloc 7.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. bowman, ms. porter and ms. williams, i inform the house that those three members will vote yes on amendments en bloc 7.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. beyer: mr. chair, as the member designated by mr. boyle of pennsylvania, ms. barragan of california, ms. moore of wisconsin, ms. newman of illinois, mr. auchincloss of massachusetts, mr. correa of california, and mr. keating of massachusetts, i inform the house that these seven members will vote yes on amendments en bloc number 7.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentlelady from virginia seek recognition? ms. intanberger: -- ms. spanberger: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. foster and ms. houlahan, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on en bloc 7.

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 355. the nays are 56. the amendments en bloc are adopted.

the unfinished business is the request for a recorded vote on amendment number 137 printed in part a of house report 117-420 by the gentlewoman from michigan, ms. tlaib on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the ayes prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will designate the amendment. the clerk: amendment number 137 printed in part a of chourp chourp -- house report 117-420 offered by ms. tlaib of michigan. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted. a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a five-minute [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.]

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? mr. bishop: mr. chair, as the member designated by mr. bennie thompson of mississippi, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. thompson will vote yes on amendment 137. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. salazar of florida, i inform the house that ms. salazar will vote no on amendment number 137. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas seek recognition? ms. garcia: mr. speaker, as the member designated by ms. escobar of texas, i inform the house that ms. escobar will vote yes on the tlaib amendment. thank you.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> mr. chair, as the member designated by mr. smucker of pennsylvania, i inform the house that mr. smucker will vote no on h.r. 8294. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? mr. takano: mr. chairman, as the member designated by representative michael san nicolas, i inform the house that mr. san nicolas will vote yes on the tlaib amendment. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? mr. norman: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. joe wilson of south carolina, i inform the house that mr. wilson will vote nay on amendment 137. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlelady from illinois seek recognition? ms. kelly: mr. chair, as the member designated by mrs. val demings of florida, i inform the house that mrs. demings will vote no on the tlaib amendment. as the member designated by mr. kahele, mr. kahele of hawaii, i

inform the house that mr. kahele will vote yes on the tlaib amendment. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. katko from new york, i inform the house that mr. katko will vote nay on amendment 137. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? mr. evans: mr. chairman, as the member designated by mr. lawson, i inform the house that m mr. lawson will vote no on h.r. 8294. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas seek recognition? mr. williams: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. john carter of the great state of texas, mr. gohmert of texas, mr. gosar, i inform the house that they will vote no on amendment 137. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pallone: mr. chairman, as the member designated by mr. albio sires, i inform the

house that mr. sires will vote no on the tlaib amendment. and mr. chairman, as the member designated by mrs. ann kirkpatrick, i inform the house that mrs. kirkpatrick will vote yes on the tlaib amendment. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? mr. fleischmann: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. palazzo of mississippi and mrs. walorski of indiana, i inform the house that mr. palazzo and mrs. walorski will vote nay on amendment 137. thank you. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlelady from virginia seek recognition? ms. spanberger: mr. chair, as the member designated by mr. foster and ms. houlahan, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on the tlaib amendment. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida seek recognition? mr. soto: mr. chairman, as the member designated by m mr. gallego, i inform the house that mr. gallego will vote yes

on the tlaib amendment. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlelady from new hampshire seek recognition? ms. kuster: mr. chairman, as the member designated by ms. pingree, ms. meng, ms. stevens, ms. leger fernandez, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on the tlaib amendment. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. beyer: mr. speaker, as the member designated by m mr. keating, mr. correa, ms. moore, ms. barragan, mr. boyle of pennsylvania, ms. newman, and mr. auchincloss, i inform the house that these seven members will vote yes on the tlaib amendment. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek

recognition? mr. neguse: mr. chair, as the member designated by ms. porter, ms. williams, and mr. bowman, i inform the house that those three members will vote yes on the tlaib amendment. the chair: for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida seek recognition? ms. wasserman schultz: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. crist of florida, i inform the house that mr. crist will vote nay on the tlaib amendment.

the chair: on this vote the yeas are 163. the nays are 260. the amendment is not adopted. the unfinished business is the request for a recorded voement on amendments en bloc 8 printed in part a of house report 117- by the gentlewoman from connecticut, ms. delauro on which further proceedings were postponed and on which the yeas prevailed by voice vote. the clerk will redesignate the amendments en bloc. the clerk: en bloc number 8 consisting of amendments numbered 183 and 184 printed in part a of house report 117-420 offered by ms. delauro of connecticut. the chair: a recorded vote has been requested. those in support of the request for a recorded vote will rise and be counted.

a sufficient number having arisen, a recorded vote is ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this will be a five-minute inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the chair: for what purpose does gentlelady california seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. salazar of florida, i inform the house ms. salazar will vote no on en bloc 8. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? mr. pallone: as the member designated by mrs. kirkpatrick and mr. sires, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on amendments en bloc

8. the chair: the gentleman from south carolina seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. joe wilson of south carolina, i inform the house that mr.~wilson will vote nay on en bloc 8. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? task as the member designated by mr. san nicholas, i inform the house that mr. san nicholas will vote yes on amendments en bloc 8. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. smucker of pennsylvania, i inform the house that mr. smucker will vote no on en bloc 8. the chair: for what purpose does gentlelady new hampshire seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. pingree, ms. meng, ms. stevens and ms. leger fernandez, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on amendments en bloc 8.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mrs. walorski of indiana and mri inform the house that these members will vote nay on en bloc 8. the chair: for what purpose does gentlelady texas seek recognition? ms. garcia: as the member designated by ms. escobar of texas, i inform the house that ms. escobar will vote yes on amendments en bloc 8.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas as the member designated by mr. carter and mr. taylor and mr. gosar, i inform the house they will vote no on number 8. >> as the member designated by ms. demmings, i inform the house that ms. demmings will vote no. as the member designated by mr. kahele, i inform the house that mr. kahele will vote yes on amendment en bloc 8. the chair: for what purpose does gentlelady virginia seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. foster and ms. houlahan, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on amendments en bloc 8.

the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. bennie thompson of mississippi, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that mr. thompson will vote yes on en bloc 8. the chair: the gentleman from florida seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. gallego, i inform the house that mr. gay eyingo will vote yes on amendments en bloc 8. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. katko of new york, i inform the house that mr. katko will vote yes. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado seek recognition? >> as the member designated by ms. porter, ms. williams and mrs

on amendments en bloc number 8. the chair: for what purpose does gentlelady florida seek recognition? ms. wasserman schultz: as the member designated by mr. crist of florida, i inform the house that mr. crist will vote nay on amendments en bloc 8. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia seek recognition? mr. beyer: as the member designated by ms. newman, mr. boyle, mr. keating, mr. correa, mr. barra began and mr. auchincloss, these members will vote yes on amendments en bloc 8. the chair: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania seek recognition? >> as the member designated by mr. lawson, i inform the house that mr. lawson votes yes on

h.r. 8294.

the chair: on this vote, the yeas are 238 and the nays are 191. the amendments en bloc are adopted. there being no further amendments, under the rule, the committee rises. the chair: the committee of the whole house on the state of the union has had under consideration h.r. 1894 -- i report the bill as amended back to the house with further

amendments adopted in the committee of the whole. the speaker pro tempore: the chair of the committee of the whole house on the state of the union reports that the committee has had under consideration the bill h.r. 8294 and pursuant to house resolution 1232 reports the bill as amended pursuant to that resolution back to the house with further amendments adopted in the committee of the whole. under the rule, the previous question is ordered. pursuant to house resolution 1232, the question on adoption of the further amendments will be put environs gross. the question is on adoption of the amendments. those in favor, say aye. those

opposed, no. the ayes have it. the amendments are adopted. the question is on environs grossment and third reading of the bill. those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. third reading. the clerk: a bill making appropriations for the departments of transportation and housing and usual and development and related agencies for the fiscal year ending september 30, 2023 and for other purposes. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order.

the house will be in order. for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i have a motion to recommit at the desk. the speaker pro tempore: the clerk will report the motion. the clerk: mr. valadao of california moves to recommit the bill to the committee on appropriations. pursuant to clause 2-b of rule 19, the previous question is ordered on the motion to recommit. the question is on the motion to recommit, those in favor, say aye. those opposed, no the nos have it and the motion is not adopted. mr. valadao: i request the yeas and nays.

the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays are requested. those favoring a vote by the yeas and nays and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered members will record their votes by electronic device. pursuant to clause 9 of rule 20, the chair will reduce to five minutes the minimum tile for any electronic vote on the question of the passage. this is a five-minute vote. [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise?

>> as the member designated by mr. smucker of pennsylvania, i inform the house that mr. smucker will vote yes on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? >> as the member designated by mr. lawson, i inform the house that he will vote no on h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does gentlelady from california rise? >> as the member designated by ms. salazar of florida, i inform the house that ms. salazar will vote aye on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? >> as the member designated by mr. bennie thompson of mississippi, pursuant to h. res. 8, i inform the house that

mr. thompson will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee rise? >> as the member designated by mr. palazzo of mississippi and mrs. walorski of indiana, i inform the house that mr. palazzo and mrs. walorski will vote yes on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey mr. pallone: as the member designated by mr. albio sires and mrs. ann kirkpatrick, i inform the house that these members will vote yes no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? mr. norman: speaker person, as the member designated by mr. joe wilson from south carolina, i inform the house that mr. wilson will vote yea on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from new hampshire rise? ms. kuster: madam speaker, as the member designated by ms. pingree, ms. meng, ms. stevens,

and ms. leger fernandez, i inform the house that these members will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? ms. weber: speaker person, as the member designated by mr. carter, mr. taylor, mr. gosar, i inform the house that they will vote yea on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? mr. beyer: madam speaker, as the member designated by m mr. keating, mr. auchincloss, ms. newman, and ms. moore, m mr. correa, ms. barragan and mr. boyle of pennsylvania, i inform the house that these seven members will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from texas rise? ms. garcia: madam speaker, as the member designated by ms. escobar of texas, i inform the house that ms. escobar will vote no on the motion to recommit. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does -- for what

purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? mr. soto: madam speaker, as the member designated by m mr. gallego, i inform the house that mr. gallego will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? >> madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. katko of new york, i inform the house that mr. katko will vote yea on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from illinois rise? ms. kelly: madam speaker, as the member designated by mrs. demings of florida, mr. kahele of hawaii, i inform the house that these members will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from virginia rise? ms. spanberger: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. foster and ms. houlahan, i

inform the house that these members will vote no on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from florida rise? ms. wasserman schultz: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. crist of florida, i inform the house that mr. crist will vote nay on the motion to recommit. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado rise? mr. neguse: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. bowman, ms. porter, and ms. williams, i inform the house that those three members will vote no on the motion to recommit.

the speaker pro tempore: on this vote the yeas are 206 and the nays are 219 with all recorded votes -- recorded as present. the motion is not adopted. the question is on the passage

of the bill. pursuant to clause 10 of rule 20, the ayes and nays are ordered. members will record their votes by electronic device. this is a five-minute vote. inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from south carolina rise? mr. norman: speaker person, as the member designated by mr. joe wilson from south carolina, i inform the house that mr. wilson will vote nay on h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey rise? mr. pallone: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. albio sires and mrs. ann kirkpatrick, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. keller: mr. speaker, meb -- madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. smucker of pennsylvania, i inform the house that mr. smucker will vote no on

h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from virginia rise? mr. beyer: madam speaker, as the member designated by m mr. keating, ms. barragan, mr. boyle, mr. correa, mr. auchincloss, ms. moore, and ms. newman, i inform the house that these seven members will vote yes on h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from washington rise? ms. herrera beutler: mr. speaker, as the member designated by mr. kinzinger, i inform the house that mr. kinzinger will vote no on h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from virginia rise? ms. spanberger: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. foster and ms. houlahan, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. weber: as the member designated by mr. paul gosar of arizona, mr. van taylor of texas, mr. john carter of texas, they will all vote no on h.r.

8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia rise? mr. bishop: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. bennie thompson of mississippi, pursuant to h.res. 8, i inform the house that mr. thompson will vote yes on h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from tennessee rise? mr. fleischmann: madam speaker, as the member designated by mrs. walorski of indiana and mr. palazzo of mississippi, i inform the house that mrs. walorski and mr. palazzo will both vote nay on h.r. 8294. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from pennsylvania rise? mr. evans: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. lawson of florida, i inform the house that mr. lawson will vote yes on final passage, h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from california rise? >> as the member designated by ms. salazar of florida, i inform

the house that ms. salazar will vote no on h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from texas rise? ms. garcia: madam speaker, as the member designated by ms. escobar, i inform the house that ms. escobar will vote yes on h.r. 8294. thank you, madam speaker. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from florida rise? mr. soto: madam speaker, as the member designated by ms. gallego, i inform the house that mr. gallego will vote yea on h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from colorado rise? mr. neguse: madam speaker, as the member designated by ms. bowman, ms. williams, and ms. porter, i inform the house that and the distinguished

parliamentarian, mr. smith, that these members will vote yes on h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from new hampshire rise? ms. kuster: madam speaker, as the member designated by ms. pingree, ms. meng, ms. stevens, and ms. leger fernandez, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlelady from illinois rise? ms. kelly: madam speaker, as the member designated by mrs. demings of florida, mr. kahele of hawaii, i inform the house that these members will vote yes on h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from ohio rise? mr. joyce: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. katko from new york, i inform the house that mr. katko will vote nay on h.r. 8294. the speaker pro tempore: for

what purpose does the gentlelady from florida rise? ms. wasserman schultz: madam speaker, as the member designated by mr. crist of florida, i inform the house that mr. crist will vote yea on h.r. 8294.

search on this vote the yeas are 220. the nays are 207. the bill is passed. without objection, the motion to reconsider is laid upon the table. for what purpose does gentlelady from connecticut seek recognition? ms. delauro: madam speaker, i ask unanimous consent that in the en grosment of h.r. 8294 the clerk be authorized to correct section numbers, punctuation, spelling, and cross-references and to make such other technical and conforming changes as may be necessary to reflect the actions of the house. the speaker pro tempore: without objection.

for what purpose does the gentleman from minnesota seek recognition? >> mr. chair, i ask unanimous consent that i may hereafter be considered as the first sponsor of h.r. 3231, a bill originally introduced by representative don young of alaska, for the purpose of adding co-sponsors and requesting reprintings pursuant to clause 7 of rule 12. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the chair will now entertain requests for one-minute speeches. for what purpose does the gentlewoman from georgia seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute.

revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order, please. >> mr. speaker,. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentlewoman is recognized. >> mr. speaker, i rise in support of the minibus appropriations bill the house passed earlier today. this legislation includes my bill to support the revitalization of vacant shopping malls like gwinnett place in my district. ms. bourdeaux: it would catalyze additional investments in these projects. the minibus also includes six of my community project funding requests, including funding for the acquisition of african-american books and historical artifacts at the hooper renwick memorial lie brairry, as well as projects to increase wrap around services for latino families and youth. provide outreach to low-income students through corners outreach. and enhance access to transit

and clean drinking water for many communities in georgia's seventh district of the all together the t-hud bill and minibus include important investments that mr. make our community stronger. thank you, i imme yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from georgia seek recognition? mr. carter: i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. the gentleman is recognized for one minute. mr. carter: mr. speaker, i rise today in honor of the inspiring career of mr. bill edwards, a native resident of savannah, georgia. after graduating from high school, bill went on to attend both the utah of mississippi and armstrong atlantic state university completing his education with a masters in the arts and communication. after serving in this high school j rotc, he furthered his interest in the army buyer serving in the army rotc at ole miss and joining the u.s. army signal corps. he continued his career until he reached the rank of captain in

the military intelligence unit in savannah. aside from his military career he was blessed with his loving wife and seven grandchildren. ones he left -- once he left the service, he had a successful career in radio broadcasting becoming host of what is now a a.m. savannah. his commitment was rewarded when he was recognized by associated press for sports precedence. i'm so grateful for bill edwards and his tireless commitment to improving his community. bill is an outstanding georgian and i thank him for all he's done for his community. thank you, mr. speaker. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from ohio seek recognition? ms. brown: mr. speaker, i ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. ms. brown: mr. speaker, life, liberty, and the pursuit of

happiness. these unalienable rights have served as a compass in guiding us as we strive to create a more perfect union. more recently these rights have been the target of relentless political attacks. attacks by a supreme court that has seemingly abandoned the promise of our constitution. and by far right extremists with a radical agenda to dismantle decades of progress to take us back. back to a time when people were shamed and murdered because the person they chose to love didn't have a certain skin color or was of the same gender. back to a time when women could not access legal and safe reproductive health care measures. today i stand in solidarity with the millions of americans who have been angered by these disgraceful acts to say, i refuse to be taken back. because we have come much too far. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentlewoman from colorado seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentlewoman is recognized for one minute. mrs. boebert: mr. speaker, fake handcuffs won't close the southern border. fake handcuffs won't lower gas prices, curb inflation, harden the supply chain, put baby formula on our shelves, deter russia, or fix our broken weak reputation across the globe. mr. speaker, fake handcuffs won't fix our education system, protect our students from c.r. t. and grooming, or create opportunities to lift communities out of poverty. fake handcuffs won't increase domestic energy, increase recruitment for our military, ooh, go woke, go broke. or solve a single problem of the actually care about.

mr. speaker, fake handcuffs make for a good photo-op, but they don't benefit the american people. fake handcuffs only benefit those who pretend to wear them. mr. speaker, this body should be delivering solutions for the american people. not fake handcuffs. without restraints i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recog recognition? >> ask unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> mr. speaker, i rise today to honor a great mayor from my district, robert bowzer, after his passing recently. mr. payne: mayor bowser served as mayor of east orange, new

jersey, from 1998 to 2014. he was the first african-american to win a third and fourth term in his office in the history of east orange. and he founded the new jersey conference of black mayors and served on the board of the national black conference of mayors. but his legacy in east orange is more than his time as mayor. he started small engineering firm that became one of the largest minority firms on the east coast. he was a board member for the local girl scouts organization and was active with the lions club and the can juanies -- can wannas. kiwannas. even founded a local touch football league. as we mourn his passing, we remember mayor bouser as a dedicated public service. servant. great business man and strong

community leader. with that, mr. speaker, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from new jersey seek recognition? >> i ask unanimous consent to address the house floor for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> i'd like to thank the house appropriations committee for their hard work on this important piece of legislation, and i rise today in support of the passage of h.r. 8284 which would help fine and prosecute cases of fraud within covid-19 economic relief. my amendment provides critical investment for the small business administration office of the inspector general to ensure they continue to hold economic injury disaster loan and paycheck protection fraudsters accountable. it provided vital resources to small businesses during the covid-19 pandemic.

mr. gottheimer: these were meant for small businesses that were struggling during the pandemic to help their families, not to help greedy cheats looking to profit off the backs of their neighbors. my amendment supports efforts for the s.b.a. to more aggressively identify eidl and p.p.p. fraud. many in my district may have been denied because of actions of these crooks and we need to hold these bad actors accountable. i strongly urge my colleagues in the senate to pass this critically important provision. thank you and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from illinois seek recognition? >> unanimous consent to address the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> the west is burning and we can't get the fire to put it out thanks to a 1,200-year drought. louisiana insurance companies are failing do you go to rising sea levels. families are paying more than ever to cool their home and fill up their tank with ever more expensive fossil fuels. and this week we learned that a majority of the senate thinks

that's fine. i think they're fine with americans paying too much for energy, they're fine with americans keeping our economy coupled to putin's war machine, they're fine with stealing from consumers and stealing from our future to subsidize fossil energy producers today. mr. casten: if you have a solar panel on your roof, electric vehicle in your driveway or energy-efficient home, you are helping your planet and helping your wallet. in the house, we, we should be, we are making that opportunity available to all americans, and yet, the senate has failed us. their failure is not only a failure to do their job. it's not only a failure of leadership. the u.s. senate is increasingly an embarrassment. i'm sick of apologizing for them. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does -- for what purpose does the gentleman from louisiana seek recognition? >> mr. speaker, i request unanimous consent to address the house for one minute and to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is

recognized for one minute. mr. carter: 988, these three digits represent an important first step towards a transformed crisis care system in america. congress passed legislation to formally authorize 988 as a new number for suicide and mental health crisis. this 24/7 hotline and textline is available to people with mental health related distress including notes of suicide, mental health crisis or substance use crisis. additionally, family and friends can use this service to support loved ones who are struggling. by calling or texting988 people will be connected with the trained counselors to do everything they can help. mental health care is health care, and enactment of 988 is a long overdue example of government finally prioritizing mental health care. there is much more to do. i'll continue to work in congress and in the community to

help fight the stigma and increase mental health support for all. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: for what purpose does the gentleman from california seek recognition? >> i request unanimous consent to speak to the house for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman is recognized for one minute. >> thank you, mr. speaker. donald trump lost the 2020 presidential election by over seven million votes. mr. lieu: trump lost arizona by over 10,000 votes. trump lost georgia by over 11,000 votes. trump lost wisconsin by over 20,000 votes. trump lost nevada by over 30,000 votes. trump lost pennsylvania by over 80,000 votes. trump lost michigan by over

150,000 votes. trump lost the electoral college 232-206. donald trump lost the 2020 presidential election. the speaker pro tempore: are there any other further requests for one-minute speeches? under the speaker's announced policy of january 4, 2021, the gentleman from catt, m mr. larson -- connecticut, mr. larson, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader. mr. larson: --

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. the gentleman is recognized. mr. larson: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today to address the body to talk about social security. i'm pleased to be joined by so many of my colleagues from across the country who understand what martin luther king called the fierce urgency of now. and why the united states congress has to act. it's been more than 51 years

since the united states congress has enhanced the benefits of social security. richard nixon was president and a gallon of milk cost 72 cents. much has changed in 51 years, and now i'm proud to announce today that the ways and means committee will be marking up social security 2100, a sacred trust, next wednesday. and in doing so, the first time in 51 years congress will be moving forward to enhance benefits for those who need it the most. why do i say that? everybody in america knows what this pandemic, this global pandemic that we're in has caused unbelievable harm across

the globe and here in this country. but who has it affected the most? of the close to one million people who have perished in the united states, over 756,000 of them are over the age of 65. and who is the group that has been hurt the most by the ensuing inflation that comes from a global pandemic and a war in the ukraine? it is people on fixed income. it is the more than 65 million americans that are on social security. i want to commend president biden for faking the leadership -- taking the leadership in this area, who campaigned across the country, assuring americans that social security was a sacred trust, which indeed it is because it

has never missed a payment. we used to have to go back to 1935 and talk about the great depression. we only have to go back as far as 2008 and 2009, because people understand during the great recession, when they saw their 401-k become a 101-k, that social security never missed a payment. not a pension payment. not a spousal payment. not a dependent payment. not a disability payment. it is america's number one insurance program, and all americans know this. and it's easily verified weekly or monthly when they look at their paycheck and it says fica, federal insurance contribution.

whose? theirs. because it's an earned benefit that they have paid into throughout their lives and, yet, congress has not acted in 51 years until now, under the leadership of president biden, speaker pelosi, and chairman richard neal, we are moving forward with legislation that will provide much-needed relief to people struggling in this pandemic and dealing with inflation. i'm pleased that i'm joined today by so many of my colleagues who have told their stories over and over again about the citizens that they are interacting with and what an enormous burden this pandemic and inflation has caused for them. and now finally, for congress to

act and how so. improving benefits across the board by more than 2% for everyone. making sure that nobody who worked all their lives and paid into a system can retire into poverty. making sure that we have a cola that actually reflects the cost that people incur. making sure that we repeal g.p.o. so that teachers and firefighters, something mr. pascrell has championed his whole time here in congress understand that relief is on its way because democrats care deeply about this. we are faced as well with an alternative from the other side. and here's the simple difference. republicans have proposed to end social security. republicans have proposed to cut social security across the board by more than 21%.

and 20 different separate proposals in their republican study plan. they have also called in committee in the eight hearings that we've had on social security to still privatize social security. democrats stand not to just protect social security but to expand social security for those that need it the most. and those assembled here today understand how vitally important it is. and now i'd like to recognize the deaness of the house of representatives from the great state of ohio and someone who understands intuitively, especially women who need this benefit the most and it's women in this country, more than three million americans receive below poverty level checks from social

security, and the vast majority of them are women. i recognize marcy kaptur from ohio. ms. kaptur: thank you. thank you, chairman larson, for your tireless leadership and work to safeguard social security for the benefit of this generation of retirees and those that are to come. you have worked harder for decades to try to bring this bill to the floor. and i want to thank speaker pelosi and chairman richard neal and congressman john larson, chair of the subcommittee, for giving us the opportunity to bring to the american people what they want and that is a strengthened retirement system under social security. for nearly a century, america has made a sacred promise. those who work and labor throughout their lives will benefit by a retirement from the fruits of their labor. it's an earned benefit for pension. it's an insurance program that

they pay into, as the gentleman has said. it's also a survivorship benefits for workers who die who have young children. and it's a disability program for those who are harmed on the job. social security is an earned benefit. yeah, it's a promise. but people earn it and it ensures the safe and secure retirement for tens of millions upon millions of americans during their golden years. to those who become disabled and, of course, their family, their children, in fact, if something unfortunate happens. without the action of chairman larson, the social security promise is deeply at risk. democrats want to strengthen social security. republicans want to end it and cripple it. with this legislation, soon to be moving through the house ways and means committee, one of the most important bills that will ever come before this chamber,

democrats will push for a vote on the floor as soon as possible. i hear from thousands of northern ohioans and people across our great state to see a responsible solution to protect and improve social security. the wealthy must join with the vast majority of americans in paying their share of social insurance at a percentage that equals what other people pay to secure social security into the future. by making that happen, the social security 2100 act will increase benefits for current and new beneficiaries. it will protect retirees against infl inflation that the gentleman has mentioned. it will continue to serve the disabled and the young children of workers who die at a far too young age. and it will repeal the windfall elimination provision that we have been trying to fix for how many decades. i think at least four. .

this act is one of the most important bills congress will ever vote on. what a privilege it will be to be able to cast a yes vote. america made a promise to workers and to retirees and families. and democrats are committed to making good on that promise. this is a democratic program. and we are going to save it as democrats and improve it. thank you chairman larson, i yield back any remaining time to you. mr. larson: thank you, marcy. i greatly appreciate the gentlelady from ohio's comments. i now want to turn the floor to matt cartwright from pennsylvania who also understands and has worked tirelessly as an original co-sponsor of this bill to make sure that several of the benefits, more than 14 enhancements to this bill, are now going to be enjoyed by the people of pennsylvania and all across this nation. matt. mr. cartwright: i thank chairman larson for yielding me the time.

it's an honor and a privilege for me to speak out in favor of this wonderful bill, social security 2100. social security, something that has been a triumph for american government for close to 100 years now. social security that has kept seniors out of poverty. it used to be that in this country seniors died in poverty. died of starvation. that happened in america. don't think it couldn't happen again. but under the social security administration, it doesn't happen. seniors who work their whole lives and pay into this insurance program reap the benefit of doing so and have money coming to them. it isn't a lot. but it's keeping people alive and out of poverty. and out of poverty through some of the most extreme down turns

in our economy -- down turns in our economy. it's something that protected seniors from starving to death during terrible moments of economic stress and distress in this country. social security is something that all of us americans ought rightfully to be proud of. that it was enacted during the roosevelt administration. that has been protected and defended for generation after generation. and that it has succeeded in keeping americans out of poverty in the most dire circumstances. it is a legacy that the democratic party are very, very proud of and all of us band together at a moment's notice to protect it when it is threatened by those who think ill of it. those instances have not been few or far between. there was the time when the early 2000s when there was this

push to privatize social security instead of paying into the system and then -- having it protected, no. the idea was just give the money to the people so they could invest it in the stock market. let's throw the money in the stock market. it was amazing that that was something that was brought up around 2004, 2005, in that time frame. what happened in 2008? the stock market cratered. if people had put their social security investments into the stock market, they would have been destitute. that's what happens when you so called privatize social security. the people that want to push that are the ones that want to push the stock market up for their own particular personal gain, but what it does at the same time is that it endangers and puts at risk the lifetime of earnings that people have put into social security to make

their own retirements safe. we can't do that. what else? that came up with this wonderful concept. the chairman talked about the cola, the cost of living adjustments that come with social security. certainly they haven't been anything to brag about over the years, but as meager and minimal as they have been, something came up about 10 years ago called change c.p.i. that was a $50 economist expression that meant lower cost of living increases for seniors. that's what they wanted. lower cost of living increases than what you were already getting on social security. we stood foursquare, shoulder to shoulder against that ridiculous provision and we put an end to that kind of talk. what else? they wanted to raise the retirement age. they always talk about that.

the right wingers want to raise the retirement age. how fair is that? raising the retirement age. for people who have been lifting and carrying and climbing and working with their hands and putting their backs into their work a whole lifetime. want to make them work into their 70's? is that what we think social security is for? is that what we think it's all about? absolutely not. democrats have stood foursquare and shoulder to shoulder against that, raising the retirement age. it gets better, as the chairman mentioned there are enemies to social security. a lot of times they don't say it out loud. they like to get rid of social security. they like to privatize it. they like to cut back on the benefits. they wring their hands about how much it costs while all the time ignoring all the people it saves

and keeps out of poverty and away from starvation. no, no. ignore all of that. they'd like to do away with it. you know what, just recently these people came out from under the shadows and identified themselves. there is a senator by the name of rick scott from florida who has said out loud that he wants federal legislation including social security and medicare, to sunset every five years and have to be re-authorized by a fresh vote. sunset. that's a euphemism for end. 's a euphemism for killing. it's a euphemism for doing away with one of the most successful programs in american legislation history. sunset social security means do away with it. that's all they are talking about. so that they are -- they have

the temerity to say out loud what many have been thinking in private, let's get rid of social security. i say enough. enough of this detraction from social security, this wonderful program. i say let's listen to chairman larson. let's make social security stronger. let's make it better. let's make it more realistic for the benefits that it pays out. let's raise the benefits by 2%. make it stronger so it's going to last longer. we haven't touched this for generation after generation. now is the time to enact social security 2100 to protect our seniors in this wonderful, enormously successful insurance program for all americans. people who retire, people who are disabled. this is a program that we must honor and respect and raise up.

we can accomplish this through this wonderful bill authored by my friend, john larson of connecticut. social security 2100. i yield back. mr. larson: i thank the gentleman. it actually is authored by 206 members of the united states congress. and i appreciate all the work that has been done. none more so, the gentleman was correct, this is the number one anti-poverty program for the elderly. it is also the number one anti-poverty program for children. it is also the program that more veterans use for disability than any, even the v.a. and it is the most efficient and effective government program in terms of cost. they operate in insurance language at what's called a 99% loss ratio, which means this. it costs less than 1%

administrative costs to distribute the greatest insurance program, the greatest anti-poverty program for the elderly, for children, and for veterans is all done by social security. that's why we need to expand it. i'm on the committee on ways and means chairman neal had a racial equity committee that our colleagues all participated in. one of the shining stars of that was none other than stacey plaskett from the virgin islands who understands that if we want to focus on what john lewis called the next great challenge for civil rights, it was to recognize how social security has treated women and specifically women of color and black males. with that i recognize stacy plaskett from the virgin islands. ms. plaskett: thank you.

it's so good to be here with you to have this discussion about social security. the importance of this safety net to so many americans. individuals throughout this country. but especially those who need it most. we have -- i'm going to give you some numbers. 17,036 retirees. 1,331 children. spouses, widows, disabled workers. those are the people in my district in the u.s. virgin islands who receive social security benefits. almost 20% of our population. on average these individuals receive $1,230 per month in benefits. that doesn't seem like a lot to so many americans, yet for many recipients they are dependent on those social security benefits to survive. social security payments put food on the table, keep roofs over head, furnish medication.

indeed for about half of senior beneficiaries social security provides the majority of their income. social security is even more important as you have stated for marginalized communities, particularly women and black americans. without social security 43% of older women would be living in poverty. in 2014, 45% of all black senior beneficiaries relied on social security for all or nearly all of their income. even in light of these details, we all know that social security system today is inadequate. the american people knew it. my constituents knew it. and i suspect my colleagues across the aisle are very much aware of that. i'm grateful for you, congressman larson, members of the democratic party, and in

particular my colleagues on the ways and means committee who are exerting leadership, who are deciding to step out and do something about it. we are not waiting around for the perfect. we are going to do some good. benefits are insufficient. the social security trust fund will start running dry in 2035. that may be around the time i need it. so we better get working on this. waiting periods are unnecessarily long. it's long past time that we act to repair sts. social security.so many things e say we are going to work on, fix, whether it's roads, infrastructure. my gosh, those are the things oftentimes it's easy for all of us to get behind. but how do we not get behind our elders? how do we not get behind those disabled workers?

widows. many of my colleagues want to quote the bible. if they are concerned with the widow, if they are concerned with those that are elders, they should be concerned with social security. i'm proud when i was approached by you, mr. larson, to act as a sponsor, a co-sponsor of this legislation. h.r. 5723, the social security 2100, a sacred trust. this legislation would increase benefits for all social security beneficiaries. it improves the cost of living adjustment, the cola, to reflect inflation. my colleagues across the aisle want to talk about inflation all the time. but when we try to give them measures to combat it, there is nothing they want to do. they vote no. each and every time. and i can almost suspect that when we get to committee and we are going to mark this up as a means to deal with inflation for our elders, they are going to say no to it as well.

it enhances benefits for widows and widowers, repeals provision that is penalize public servants, and ensures that no one retires in poverty. h.r. 5723 promotes fairness in our social security system. it provides a tax cut for middle income beneficiaries by raising taxation thresholds while also ensuring millionaires and billionaires pay their fair share. . finally, this legislation makes practical improvements to social security services. it ends the five-month waiting period to receive benefits. enhances access to legal assistance and prevents unwarranted closures of s.s.a. field offices. by increasing benefits, promoting fairness and improving access, democrats are putting social security to not only help

beneficiaries today, but will also help future beneficiaries by expanding the trust fund's lifespan. this may not solve every problem in our social security system and may not include provisions that every member desires, but it will make a tangible, positive impact on the lives of nearly 60 million americans. i know that on the other side we hear things such as an 11-point plan to rescue america. and among other things the plan calls for federal legislation to sunset after five years so congress would need to approve it. we see them discussing 20% across-the-board cuts to social security. we say no to that. we want to support our elders, support the system, give a helping hand and fight inflation.

as president roosevelt stated in 1935 when he signed the social security act into law, this law too represents a cornerstone in a structure which is being built. but it by no means is complete. it is in short a law that will take care of human needs and at the same time provide the united states an economic structure of vastly greater soundness. i urge the house to lay another cornerstone in this unfinished structure by passing h.r. 5723. our moral character as a nation is determined not by how we treat corporations and billionaires and the powerful, but rather how we treat the most vulnerable among us. hardworking seniors who have earned a peaceful retirement, people with disabilities who need support, veterans who

kraiblgously defended -- courageously defended their country, widows and children who have lost a loved one. they are not asking for a handout or free ride, rather they have worked hard to support their families and their countries and have paid into social security. now they are simply asking their government to maintain the promise of social security and extend a helping hand during hard times. i want to thank my colleagues for the work that's been done to bring this to the floor. mmr. larson, i want to thank the staff. this is something that is sustainable and is going to support not just the people receiving the benefits, but there's a benefit to all americans by us doing this in the long run. i thank you for the opportunity to speak and i yield back. mr. larson: i thank the

gentlelady for her comments and especially as it relates to staff. also for her comments about the -- this is the cornerstone, a key ground-laying cornerstone of the human infrastructure. can i ask how much time we have remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 32 minutes remaining. mr. larson: the gentleman now recognizes the distinguished vice chair of the committee on social security,ed leader in congress -- the leader -- security, the leader in congress in making sure that firefighters and police officers and teachers are taken care of across the board, but specifically as it relates to social security and g.p.o. i recognize mr. pascrell from new jersey. mr. pascrell: thank you, mr. chairman. mr. larson: being followed by ms. frankel from florida. mr. pascrell: mr. speaker, i rise today on behalf of the more than 124,000 of our neighbors in

the ninth congressional district who rely on social security each and every month. and i rise also, mr. speaker, because 26 years ago, when i first ran for congress against an incumbent, i was fighting for social security because there was an issue in that election of 1996. we had choices. choices. privatize, that's the way you get to the goal line. and senior housing, senior development, one after the other. the first thing i heard when i walked in the door when i was campaigning in the first congressional campaign of my

life was what are you going to do about social security? the number of 124,000 is growing in every state, every single day. not getting smaller. we have more of an older community in the united states of america. and i'm proud to have been part of that community for a few years. we'll leave it at that. social security's one of our nation's greatest success stories. and after 86 years, social security still stands as a monument for decency, for dignity and hardworking americans. we talk about it a lot. talk about the middle class. talk about the poor. that's what we do, we talk a lot

about it. yet throughout that storied history, social security has been under attack. going back to 1935 and f.d.r., day one it's been the subject of attacks and lies. those lies continue to this day. it's taken its toll. social security is no grab-bag giveaway, but benefits that you've earned, you paid into with your own sweat and toil. without aggressive action, it teters towards insolvency. congress has a sacred responsibility to protect social security for today's seniors and

for tomorrow's. their kids, their grandkids. so i'm proud to stand here with my very good friend, representative john larson, as a strong supporter of his social security 2100 pact. this historic bill will ensure the strength and solvency of social security for today's seniors. the social security 2100 act provides fully paid for benefit enhancements. not cuts in benefits. oh, please notice who is advocating for those cuts. not just seniors, those to be seniors and their kids and grandkids. they teach president biden's promise to not raise taxes on

middle class families. this is a no-brainer. among its many improvements this bill eliminates the unnecessary five-month disability benefits waiting period. that, coupled with the inadequacy of our postal officials, is enough to do away with the seniors, i'll tell you that. i hope that's not the point. additionally it will ensure americans suffering with terminal and debilitating disorders like huntington's disease get the help they need without red tape. importantly, we've updated the legislation so that our firefighters, we're always putting our arms around our firefighters and our police and our teachers and other public servants, but now that we see the full social security benefits that they've earned --

social security lifts more americans out of poverty than any other federal program. 21 million each year. over 40% of senior beneficiaries, it provides a expwhroort of their income -- it provides a majority of their income. their lives literally depend on it. that's not an exaggeration, mr. speaker. that is the importance of social security to america. we're fighting for our seniors who have worked their entire lives and we're fighting for working families so that no one who pays their whole lives should ever retire in poverty. that's a scourge. with unified control of government, we must get this done. there are no excuses.

i thank you and i yield back and congratulations to the committee and its chairman to get us this far. mr. larson: i want to thank the gentleman from new jersey for his unwavering support and dedication not only to the firefighters and police and teachers across this country who will benefit from this legislation, but all americans and especially those in patterson, new jersey, who he's dedicated his life to serving. mr. speaker, i'm going to recognize now a woman who understands the significance of social security, hailing from a state of florida which is probably the senior center capital of the world in terms of the population there of senior citizens. and in doing so i want to recognize the number of

committees that have come out in support of this legislation, including the national committee to preserve and protect social security, social security works, the naacp, the national -- the federation of american -- the national organization of women, the latinos for secure retirement, the national education association, the a.f.t. and more than 350 organizations have come and endorsed the work of lois frankel who understands what seniors need, not only in florida, but across this nation. the gentlelady from florida. ms. frankel: thank you, mr. speaker. i want to first thank my colleague, mr. larson, for spear heading this fight to keep social security secure. republicans, it's hard to believe that republicans actually want to stop the program in five years so they

can reassess -- i'll tell you, that's big trouble. it's big trouble if they do that for the millions and millions and millions of americans who depend on social security. 4 1/2 million, mr. larson, who live in the state of florida. you know, our workers, they spend their lives working hard for these benefits. and so don't they deserve when they retire to make sure that they have enough money to see that their bills are paid? and that's why this social security act, 2100, is so important. it's going to improve a needed bump to the cost of living. it's going to provide a special benefit for low-wage earners, folks like waitresses and custodians, nurse's aided, people who -- aides, people who are important to our economy. and this is a big deal. it's a big deal, especially for the retirees who depend on

social security to cover their everyday expenses. and, look, just ask alice from my hometown, a housekeeper her entire life. she worked 40 hours a week until she turned 65, earning $923 a month on social security. her rent just increased to a whopping $855 a month. that's not sustainable. that's not right. that's not what america's about. no one who has worked hard their entire life should retire into poverty. and so i'm proud to join my colleagues, overwhelming support by democrats for the social security act, 2100. it has the updates we need to keep this program working now and for the future and let me just say, the timing of this

bill could not be more urgent. thank you and i yield back. mr. larson: i thank the gentlelady from florida. every now and again we find leaders in the country that -- who may come from the house but all of a sudden take on national prominence. why is that? because they speak straightforward to the people. in the case of tim ryan in ohio, they're really speaking to the entire nation. bhar they talking about? more than 10,000 baby boomers a day that become eligible for social security. and the individuals that have worked all of their lives and paid into a program and receive below poverty level checks from their government.

and also a pay-for in this program that has the wealthiest people paying their fair share, simply by lifting the cap on people making over $400,000. that's .04% of the american public. even with that, we'll be paying proportionately -- will be paying proportionately less than a person earning $35,000 to $50,000. the person who speaks to that working class and it resonates not only in ohio but across this great nation of our, the next senator from the state of ohio, tim ryan. mr. ryan: i thank the gentleman from connecticut. i appreciate the opportunity to speak here with you. i just want to say, i've been in congress now for 20 years and have known mr. larson for that long. and he has been an absolute

bulldog on this issue. i think, john, you understand better than most the impact of this program and to just consistently year in and year out get this on the radar screen and now we're going to have a markup next week on this and really proposing this, i think, at a time of great need. the pan democrat ekwe all have experienced over the last few years, the economic collapse that we -- the global economic collapse we saw in the last couple of years pulled the veil back on a lot of problems that we've had in this country. we could go through the entire list but i think one of them that is most significant is how many people in this country, how many seniors in this country, struggle to make ends meet? and the wealth -- in the wealthiest country on god's green earth, the most significant, most dynamic economy, we have, you know, a handful of people building their

own space station, going into space, god bless, that can only happen in america. but the reality is the vast majority of people in this country are still struggling. and what we're talking about here is a group of people who did everything right. busted their rear ends. their whole life. single moms taking care of a couple of kids. people working in factories. people waitressing, nurses, public servants. people who are out there every single day and have done everything right. and this is what the social security system is all about. i remember, you know, my grandparents passed away, i remember going through their drawers at their house. you know, got to clean everything up. it's really a heartbreaking experience. i found this little black book that was my great grandfather's. dominic guera. came other from italy with 17 bucks in his pocket.

he was hit -- it was his little black book. i opened it up. it had, on the left side it had the names of the people who belonged to this group that was called the balsini club. he came from that little village in italy. and he -- it was the balsini club. it was the name of all the italians from that area in niles, ohio. at the of the book were the months of the year. it would say like dominic guera, all these names, lot of vowel, lot of vowels in this book. and it would say january, $1. february $1. march, nothing. april, nothing. may, nothing. june $1. it was the same for all the different names that were there. it was a mutual aid book.

it was an insurance -- it was just a group of people kind of putting their own insurance, you know, plan together because one day i'm up and you're down and the next day i'm down and you're up. and in that -- and that was before social security. that was before medicare. people coming together. collectively to help each other. which is a basic american value. and so this system was put in place because that was probably happening all across the country with different ethnic groups and franklin roosevelt and others said, hey, we better do something about. this collectively come together. that's what this is about. this is an earned benefit. and i will tell you the american value that undergirds this program is the same american value that has lit this country up since its inception. it is the idea and the value of

freedom. right? freedom has been the principle here in the united states. and so we're talking about economic freedom here. we talk about it with the work force. we talk about it with the rebuilding the middle class. why? so people could be free. economic freedom. you know. don't have so work 50 or 60 hours a week. got time for the things that are important. you got a few extra bucks to take your kids to the college football game or the, you know, if you're into self-flagellation, the cleveland browns game. you know. but go fishing. go hunting. you know. maybe have a little boat. economic freedom. when we're talking about our seniors we're talking about freedom. economic freedom for them to live independent lives. seniors don't want to be a burden on their kids. they don't want to be a burden on their grandkids. and what mr. larson and what the

social security 2100 act is saying is how do we lift everybody up? put a few more bucks in people's pockets who have done everything right. making sure people aren't living in poverty. making sure they're independent. they can take care of themselves. that's what this bill does. and it asks people making over $400,000 a year to help make that happen. i think this is a significant piece of legislation, i think this is the -- this program is the backbone of the working class. i'll tell you something else. this is the backbone, this program is the backbone of rural america. where so many jobs have been lost. so many -- it's the backbone of these factory towns that have seen so much loss. and you have issues around addiction. overdose. fentanyl. grandparents raising grandkids. couldn't happen without social security. and the one significant provision in here is to say if a

husband and a wife are both relying on social security, and one dies, that they're going to get at least 75% of the total. of both recipients. that's a significant step. because we hear so often of a spouse dying and then all of a sudden there is an economic -- there isn't economic independence anymore. there isn't freedom. there isn't the ability to take care of yourself. i'm here today to just say this is a phenomenal thing. i think when most americans, democrat, republican, and independent, hear about this, there's going to be and continue to be significant support for these reforms. i hope this bill gets marked up. i hope it comes to this floor for a vote. i hope the senate agrees and i hope we pass it and reform it and we're going to lift up millions of people, millions of seniors in this country and we have john larson to thank for that. i yield back the balance of my time. mr. larson: i want to thank the gentleman from ohio. i'm so proud he's going to be

going to the united states senate because in the united states senate, mr. scott from florida has proposed ending social security in five years. ohio needs to make sure that it is sending someone to the united states senate that is not going to end social security in five years, but is going to expand social security now when we need it, when we're in the worst pandemic in the history of the country, when we're suffering through inflation. the time to act is now. as martin lotter -- luther king would say it's the fierce urgency of now. it's been 51 years. since congress has done anything. and that's something that ted lieu of california understands and has been working tirelessly as an original co-upon cor of this bill to reach out not only to the the citizens of california but all across this country and make sure that

they're going to have the benefits that can sustain them. our goal is to expand benefits, not to cut them. i recognize the gentleman from california. mr. lieu: thank you, chairman larson. thank you, mr. speaker. democrats are focused on putting people over politics by lowering costs, increasing american jobs, and having safe communities. what republicans -- what are republicans focused on? ending social security. how do we know that? they put it in writing. they want to end social security in five years. we need to not only end the republicans' ability to end social security, we need to expand social security. and that's why i'm so proud to be here to support john larson's social security 2100: a sacred trust. in my district alone there are nearly 120,000 social security recipients who receive an

average average in total of $2 million in benefits. this is vital, lifesaving for millions of americans. why is it called a sacred trust? it's called a sacred trust because our government promised over 85 years ago that if you contribute to social security with chevre paycheck, you can retire with dignity. president biden called that a sacred trust. chairman larson's sacred trust bill is how we need to make social security stronger and even better and i think it's important to just talk about how awesome this bill is. let me talk to you about some of the provisions. it has a benefit bump for current and new social security benefits of 2%. in addition, it has protection against inflation. and it does that by improving the outtated cola formula that currently is in social security. the bill also improves social

security benefits for widows and widowers. this bill repeals windfall elimination provision, ends the five-month waiting period to receive disability benefits. the bill also provides caregiver credits toward social security. it extends social security dependent benefits. it increases access to social security dependent benefits for children who live with grandparents or other relatives. the bill also requires social security agency to mail annual statements to all workers. and it improves access to legal representation for people seeking long-term disability benefits. this is an awesome bill. this is exactly the kind of legislation that we need to move off the floor and it is -- and stt -- i is in stark contrast to what republicans are doing. again, republicans want to end social security in five years. and how do we know that? they put it in writing. not just one republican, but multiple republicans. this is a severe danger to our

nation if we wipe out this life-saving program and it's important that we not only make sure that that doesn't happen but that we expand social security, especially in their coming out of a pandemic where people are facing all these challenges, obstacles, folks on fixed incomes cannot often get additional income and that's why the only way to do this is to increase social security and we do that by passing john larson's social security 2100: a sacred trust. with that, i yield back to chairman larson. mr. larson: i thank the gentleman from california. i would like to point out that this is a bipartisan plan. probably more correctly called nonpartisan. why? because independents, democrats, and republicans of all ages, of

all backgrounds and ethnic group, support social security. because it is as president biden indicated, a sacred trust. people as congressman ryan pointed out, whether you're in a rural area or an urban area, whether you're on the coast or in the great plains of this country, you're impacted by social security. this is about your mother and father, it's about your brothers and sisters. it's what i call the great mirror test. if you can look your constituents in the eye and we've provided every member of congress with a card that says how many of your constituents

receive social security, it is congress' responsibility, this is not something that can happen through executive order. this is not something that the supreme court is going to rule on. this is only something that this is only something congress can do. we're blessed in the house that we have a great leader in nancy pelosi. it was nancy pelosi back in 2005 that led the charge, that was horacio on the bridge, so to speak, to prevent the privatization of social security. and we were successful and thank god we were, for had that plan succeeded, 2008 and 2009 would have been far more disastrous

and yet as we all know, social security in the midst of that recession never missed a paim. not a spousal -- payment. not a spousal or dependent pay the, not a disability payment and not a pension payment -- payment, not a disability payment and not a pension payment. and now it's nancy pelosi as well and president biden and a number of republicans who know in their hearts and know because when they give that test and go home and look at their family members, in the midst of this pandemic, in the midst of this inflation, the most successful and the most efficiently run governmental program that we have should be embraced by everyone, to give the access and relief that our seniors need, that our disabled veterans need.

that our children continue to need. presidents eisenhower and -- president eisenhower and president nixon, the last president under whom we expanded social security benefits, that was in 1971. and a gallon of milk cost 72 cents. what seniors have endured, and like most, like my mother, would turn to their children and say, don't worry about me, i don't want to be a burden. my mother, your mothers were never a burden. they were an inspiration to us all. and we all owe it to them to make sure that they live out

their lives in the simple dignity of knowing they can't retire into poverty. that is the promise of social security. it hasn't kept pace. how could it, if it hasn't been expanded in 51 years? and now its solvency is in question and this bill expands its solvency. and it most importantly expands the benefits that are so vitally needed and especially as mr. pascrell pointed out to teachers and firefighters and police officers and municipal employees who, through no fault of their own, have found themselves on the short end of congresses in action.

it's the fierce urgency of now. when you go home ask your constituents. when you travel to a senior center and face them, eye ball to eye ball, and say, how can i help you, they will respond, by fixing social security, by giving us a cola that actually reflects the cost that we incur, that don't tax us while we still work because we have to make ends meet. to make sure that we're expanding benefits across the board for everyone because it is everyone's program and make sure that the wealthy pay their fair share. that's what president biden has called for.

we're here to expand social security, not end it. please, i beg of my colleagues on the other side, join us in expanding benefits that you know need to be expanded on behalf of the citizens you represent. and with that i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. under the speaker's announced policy of january 4, 2021, the gentleman from louisiana, mr. johnson, is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. speaker. and i ask unanimous consent that all members have five legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include extraneous material on the subject of my special order. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. johnson: thank you, mr. speaker. the recent supreme court term has come to an end and the court's decisions have sent washington democrats into a

tailspin. members of this body have called to abolish the supreme court. by the way, some of those very same members have also called to expand the supreme court, so we're not really sure which one they're committed to. just yesterday members of this body were pretended to be handcuffed for their support over taxpayer abortion on-demand until birth. washington democrats are making excuses for the outright harassment of supreme court justices and even their families, their children, and even the assassination attempt on the life of justice kavanaugh. washington democrats are silent on attacks against some have even called for the centers to be shut down all around the nation. shut down? it's appalling. it's unhinged. why would anyone want to shut down pregnancy centers that are designed to help struggling mothers in their time of need?

but, you know, that's where we are. why all the hiss tarics, though -- hiss tariks -- hysterics, though? why do they want to tear this institution to the ground? here's the simple reason. because the supreme court has made some very thoughtful constitutionally based decisions in this term. they correctly said, for example, that a football coach was exercising his first amendment rights when he privately prayed on the sidelines on the 50-yard line. the supreme court correctly said that citizens don't have to ask the government for permission to exercise their fundamental rights to keep and bear arms. the supreme court correctly said that congress, you know, if congress wants to address climate change, then congress has to legislate on that issue. instead of just outsourcing that work to unelected bureaucrats. because the supreme court

correctly said that elected representatives of the people may, again, be allowed to place restrictions on the killing of innocent unborn children. that -- that's why they're motivated. that's why they're so unhinged and tear the institution to the ground. i guess we shouldn't be surprised by all this. we are, after all, only a couple months removed from senator schumer's infamous, dangerous, unhinged rant on the steps of the supreme court itself where he said, he called out justices gorsuch and kavanaugh by name and said, hey, we're going to release the whirlwind on you. well, it happened. it's clear what is happening here. democrats are doing anything and everything they can to try to use these obvious and straightforward supreme court decisions to stoke fear and change the subject before the november election. but here we are today to say that this election will be about three things. it's going to be primarily about soaring inflation, uninhabited

illegal immigration, and the gender -- general staggering incompetence they see by the democrats in charge of washington. the three i's i call it. inflation, immigration, incompetence. i think it summarizes it pretty well. there was a very interesting story on cnn this week that called vulnerable democrats sound the alarm over inflation crisis. welcome to the party. it's a little late for that. i humbly suggest those vulnerable democrats should have thought about that before they passed to vote $5.4 trillion with a t, trillion dollars in new partisan spending last year. we warned emthis. -- we warrant them. this is so completely foreseeable. and now that the bill is coming to these vulnerable democrats are hoping the american people will just simply forget their vote. we don't intend to let that happen because the stakes are too high and the issue is too important. i thank my colleagues for joining us today to discuss the harm that the democrat agenda

has caused our country and our alternative conservative vision for how to fix all this. mr. speaker, i am delighted to yield first, among my many colleagues that will be joining me in the hour, to the gentleman from pennsylvania who knows a whole lot about the economy, mr. meuser. mr. meuser: well, i thank my very good friend, mr. johnson from louisiana, for offering this opportunity to speak on the important issues. mr. speaker, one year ago this week president biden stood before the american people and said that inflation was fefrp temporary. at that time the consumer price index, which measures inflation, of course, stood at 5.4%. in the 365 days since the price of nearly everything has increased, the consumer price index has skyrocketed to 9.1%. 9.1%. eggs are up 33%. milk is up 16%. chicken is up 18%. and worst of all, americans are paying over 60% more for

gasoline than they were a year ago, costing the american family, my constituents, and throughout our country nearly $6,000 extra a year. and now we have our transportation secretary telling us the truth that this pain -- and i'm quoting -- will lead to more purchases of electric cars. so that was the plan. thanks for being honest, mr. secretary. meanwhile, however, the administration nor the secretary of transportation has any understanding of where the energy comes from to charge all of these electric cars. they are not exactly chess players, mr. speaker. and as my friend from -- mr. johnson from louisiana put it, inflation, incompetence, the third i? imflakes. thank you -- immigration. thank you. and instead of taking any action to correct this devastating problem, the effect it has on american families and small businesses and large businesses,

you name it, dogs and cats, probably, the biden administration has doubled down on the backwards policies and undertaken a massive blame game campaign. not exactly a profile encourage taking place here, mr. speaker. first, they branded the inflation brought on their rec reckless spending the putin price hike. and then long before the russian invasion of ukraine, by the way. then the administration laid the blame their policies at the feet of greedy corporations, yeah, and then local gas station owners. mr. speaker, 60% of the gas stations throughout our country and certainly in my district are owned by small business independent people. they're to blame for the gas prices we're paying? when faced with the highest gas prices in history caused by atrocious energy policies, the president of the united states and many democrat members of this house point their fingers and blame small business owners.

the american people aren't fooled by the finger pointing, although they are paying a steep price for it. despite the administration's best efforts, we've learned inflation was not temporary and has continued to skyrocket largely because of the biden house democrats' out of control spending. instead of addressing america's inflation crisis, house democrats have continued to push for billions more in government spending which will increase inflation, not decrease it. continued excessive spending will increase inflation. it is a mathematical and physical certainty. we must correct course, stop the reckless spending and unleash domestic energy production which will strengthen both our economy and our national security. we must also stop overregulating and overtaxing small businesses and enough with the blame games and these go woke, end broke policies. they have failed the american people. mr. speaker, the free nations of the world need a strong united states, both militarily and

economically, to lead. we face serious threats, free nations worldwide know that the world is far more -- is a far more peaceful and stable place with a strong american leadership. the weakness shown at our southern border and the ukraine border initially have had devastating effects on humanity and on the stability of the united states, europe and the free world. only with a clear vision, realistic plan and earnest execution will this be corrected. i yield back. mr. johnson: thank you is so well said, my friend. and it's so true that a strong and vibrant america is good not only for the people in this country, but for the people all around the world. we maintain the peace through strength and if we don't show that strength, we're in real jeopardy. mr. speaker, i am delighted to yield next to my good friend from the state of texas, right over the border, dr. babin. mr. babin: i want to thank my friend from louisiana. i appreciate you, mr. johnson, for having this special order.

mr. speaker, according to a recent "new york times" poll, more than 77% of americans think that the country is on the absolutely wrong track. and they're right. inflation is at a inflation is at a 41-year high. small businesses can't afford to stay open. real wages are down 4%. skyrocketing prices cost americans an extra $500 or more per month. hardworking americans are paying more for almost everything while they're taking home less. why? the answer is simple. joe biden and the democrat party have put politics over your prosperity. think about that. over the last year and a half, they've repeatedly shown us that their green fantasy is more important than you being able to feed your family or fill up your car with gas lean. the administration says we are in a, quote, economic transition

moment. yes, this inflation was supposed to be temporary and transer to, according to the administration. but prices have risen for 14 straight months since that announcement was made. you don't need to be an economist to agree. we're undoubtedly in a state of transition. the real question is, what are we transitioning into? my colleagues across the aisle avoid this question at all costs because the facts just don't back up their fictitious answers. but let me tell you the truth. you don't need to like donald trump to accept the fact that our economy prospered under his leadership. you don't need to be a republican to accept the fact that our nation flourished under free market small government policies, policies that allowed americans to thrive without big brother interference you don't need to be in politics to accept the fact that our country has been in a perpetual state of

crisis under president joe biden. our economy is plummeting, our southern border is nonexistent, our military is shrinking and our standing on the world stage is in rapid decline. so to answer the question of what we're transitioning into, well, under the left's woke agenda, america will transform into a broke, borderless, weak, socialist nation, unable to compete internationally or defeat those who seek our very demise. it's a very frightening future and one that we as the g.o.p. cannot let come to fruition. with that, i yield back, mr. speaker. mr. johnson: thank you my friend. it is a very stark reality that we face. but we're optimists. we know we can turn this around. the american people are going to give us a chance this fall, aren't they? thank you for that good word and stark reminder. mr. speaker, i am delighted to yield next, we'll go from texas to the great state of virginia,

mr. good. mr. good: thank you, mr. chairman. i still refer to mr. chairman, mr. johnson of louisiana. thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the democrat majority is covid crazy. january 6 forever, january 6 crazy. climate crazy. everything is racist. everything is seen through a transgender lens. and then there's the policies. their policies that are wrecking harm on the american people. and that the american people don't want. they've done so much harm to the country in the last year and a half as they've had the majority along with the white house. it's hard to put your finger upon what's the worst thing that's happened to the country? is it the rapidly rising violent crime? the undermining of our police, putting victims, putting criminals ahead of victims, criminals ahead of police? and just now figuring out if you cut police if you defund police if you don't support police,

then of course you get more crime. is it what they're doing to our military, woke-phiing our -- woke-ifying our military, that think our military is a social experiment, kicking out military members because they don't get a vaccine, we have 100,000 at risk of being kicked out of the military when we can't meet recruiting goals? is it the border? we could go on and on about the border. is that the worst crisis? what this president had to do to keep a secure border was nothing. instead we've aloud some four million, four million, now averaging about 10,000 a day, illegal aliens crossing into our country. over three million acknowledged by border patrol encountered at the border, most released into the interior of the country. and some 800,000 criminal

gotaway who don't want to be taken into custody, don't want to be given free health care, don't want to be gip free education, free social services, free transportation wherever they want to go, without a quarter to appear. the ones who evaded capture because of sex traffic, child trafficking across the border. the ones with terrorist ties, criminal tie, who will do irreparable harm in the days, weeks and months ahead. then you look at the energy policy. which is driving along with the rapid spending, is driving the inflation in this country. energy policy. what did we need to do when this president took over a year and a half ago to remain energy independent for the first time in history? nothing. continue the policies. but this president during the campaign promised to declare war on fossil fuels to end american energy essentially, oil and gas production in this country, and that is a promise that he has kept. the way his -- he's willfully put regulatory burden, restricks on the energy industry and now he goes essential will --

eencial -- essentially with a big gas can over to the middle east, begging those producers who don't produce as clean lay li as we do, to produce more to bail him out. now we have a transportation secretary who has no experience in transportation, who says the more pain we can cause the more benefit. the more pain with rising gas price, the more benefit. memo, most americans can't afford a $70,000 electric vehicle. most americans don't have somebody to drive them around in a big s.u.v. so they can get out of the s.u.v. right before the photo op and get on their bicycle and just bike the last block to work. most americans don't have that option. this administration, this democrat majority, is out of touch with the american people, they're hurting the country, these poll vis being rejected, and you're going to see in 111 days from today, the representation of that and the demonstration of that on november 8. thank you and i yield back, mr.

chairman. mr. johnson: there's so many important fact there is. it's hard to count all the crises, isn't it? thank you, my friend, well said as usual. mr. speaker, i'm happy to yield next to the gentleman from tennessee, faithful to come on this floor week after week and relay the facts to the american people, mr. rose. mr. rose: thank you, vice chairman, appreciate the time on the floor today to speak about these important matters. mr. speaker, when tennesseans go to the gas pump and grocery store they are constantly reminded of the fact that everything was much more affordable only one year ago. since president biden has taken office and congressional democrats have reckless libor roed and spent trillions of dollars, cost of living has skyrocketed at a rate not seen since 1981 when i was just a junior in high school. commonsense will tell you this

massive amount of deficit spending overheeded -- overheated the economy and created a labor shortage from folks staying home instead of working. commonsense will also tell you the only way -- common sense will also tell you the only way to fix the issue is turn the money spigots off here in washington and stop this borrow and spend economic death spiral. common sense has once again failed the chamber as the democrats passed a funded bill filled with partisan initiatives costing hundreds of billions of dollars. the socialist spending bill, house democrats passed today increased some accounts by double and even triple digit percentages in some cases. it rewards the food and drug administration which failed to quickly address the baby formula shortage with a budget increase. it also increases the budget for the department of homeland security who instead of enforcing our laws and stopping illegal immigration, is encouraging it by attempting to

repeal title 42. it even increases the budget to maintain and improve federal buildings by 12% even though many of these buildings have been mostly empty for the last two years. there are a lot of bad policies in this bill but one of the worst has to be the exclusion of the hyde amendment. the hyde amendment is a bipartisan amendment that has existed for decades to prevent your taxpayer dollars from being used to help fund abortions. this is completely incomprehensible to me. in no way, shape or form should taxpayers be subsidizing abortions with taxpayer dollars. tennesseans are sick and tired of borrowing money from china and forcing their grandchildren to foot the bill. the state of tennessee should serve as a role model for members of congress. we have been committed in tennessee to enacting fiscally

responsible policies up and down each level of government. we don't even have a state income tax and yet are still able to fund the government without driving our state into a hole of debt from which we'll never get out. i just can't help but think how one party rule in washington has completely failed the american people. democrats have controlled both chambers of congress and the executive branch for almost two years now and americans are paying the price. tennesseans are rightfully upset with their federal government and feel as though their concerns about the future of this country are not being heard. a recent poll shows that in april of 2020, during the height of the covid lockdowns, americans actually thought our nation's future looked brighter than it does right now. we can't continue down this path. we must do everything we can to

rein in the reckless spending as interest rates begin to rise, our $30 trillion and rising national debt will only continue to get more expensive as the interest on the debt grows right along with it. squeezing out funding for other vital programs. with interest rates now rising at a rapid clip it's all just a ticking time bomb ready to go off. i strongly urge my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to listen to the american people and tennesseans back home and do what's right for the sake of our country and our children, recognize the policy fail dwhroifers last two years, and commit to joining republicans in our desire to restore fiscal common sense. thank you, mr. vice chairman, i yield back. mr. johnson: so many great points there. i appreciate you coming here and explaining that. we can't say it too often. mr. speaker, i am happy to yield next to another good friend, great colleague, great spokesman

for the conservative viewpoint out of the state of kansas, mr. man. mr. mann: i want to thank the gentleman for hosting this special order hour and for all he's doing to help get the conservative voice out there. i rise to deliver the 13th installment of my impablght series at times when wheat harvest in kansas are compounded by inflation. producers are laboring under the burden of skyrocketing input costs while they work hard to keep our country fed, fueled and clothe. they deserve workable solutions before the situation gets any worse. farming is already a risky, very tail business without the added burden of inflation. it's estimated input costs will continue to rise at astroknot no, ma'am call rates through 2022. for example, the wheat harvest just ended in kansas and the returns for a fraction of the yield they bank on in normal

seasons. the farm bill exists in part for situations like this past wheat season to write emergency assistance to the people who feed, fuel and clothe the world even when mother nature doesn't cooperate. the weather in kansas can be extreme and unpredictable which means growing wheat in the wheat state can be a difficult prospect at times. i had an intern in my office who is a rising senior at kansas constituent yawfort where he serves as student body president. he's also a member of the sixth generation of his family's farm in scott city which lies in my district. the farm is a wheat, sorghum operation. this year, due to extreme conditions, much of the wheat never grew past three inches tall. you don't have to farm to know that's not good. what's typically a three to four-week wheat harvest only lasted a day and a half. many wheat farmers barely ran

their combines, they harvested what they could, cut their losses and moved on. this is where things like crop insurance comes in. crop insurance serves producers and consumers alike, it prevents producers from going out of business and grocery shelves from sitting empty. they have helped generation of after generation avoid bankruptcy when times are tough. we're in one of those times right now. inflation is skyrocketing, president biden is trying to impose a farm killer tax at the same time and producers are going out of bisms the chance to re-authorize a farm bill has come at a critical moment at time. the farm crisis isn't just about money, it's about morale and spirit. it's about joy. missing wheat harvest time in kansas doesn't just mean yielding out on a cash crop but missing out on the tradition of celebrating your hard work. missing out on grandma's casserole, missing out on seeing your mom in the semi, your little brother getting to drive the grain cart for the first

time. it doesn't just create financial insecurity, it leaves a void where renewal of family camaraderie should be. they're being hurt not by highest costs but lower morale that comes from drought, 24eu7b margins and a broken supply chain. congress must re-authorize the farm bill with america's families in front of their mind. i'll be back on the floor soon to deliver another installment of my farm bill input series. i believe congress must understand the people who feed, fuel and clothe us all deserve our unwavering support. they also deserve our robust safety net in the farm bill and workable solutions to the inflation crisis before us. thank you, i yield back my time. thank you for hosting this. mr. johnson: thank you for standing up for those wheat farmers. for all those in the ag community, this is just a critical issue and you're exactly right. the inflation crisis has real

world consequences and that's just some of them. mr. speaker, i am happy to go across the country to california again to hear once more from our dear and faithful friend, mr. lamalfa. mr. lamalfa: thank you to my colleague from louisiana, mr. johnson, for continuing to lead this in order to get this important message out on what's facing americans, not because of a naturally caused crisis, but a man m&ad one, a government m&ad -- man-made one. a government-made one. we're doing it to ourselves. so instead of addressing the economic crisis that's plaguing americans, the democrats are prioritizing liberal initiatives and increasing federal spending with some accounts receiving double-digit and even triple digit percentage increases typically through regulatory agencies that make our jobs harder to do.

this is a small example here of things where prices are going up. we've had a lot of droughts but in my home state of california, some of that drought and some of the shortages of water indeed are because of government action. the priorities that we see for the spending include giving 20% more money to the e.p.a. i've had the e.p.a. work in conjunction with the amply corps of engineers to -- army corps of engineers to have people stop farming in my district because they think it might have an affect on the clean water act or something like that. these are fields that have been farmed in the past, that have been falo for paryd of time -- for a period of time. they need a permit. they didn't think they needed a permit, they didn't know they needed a permit, so they get fined big-time. so as americans face this runaway inflation caused by out of control government spending and utter regulatory issues that drive up the cost of everything, these are the solutions we get,

even more government. so i put some reasonable amendments across recently to try and move things the right direction and not have these outlandish spending ideas take hold. for example, my home state of california, you may have heard of our high speed rail project that supposedly would link san francisco to los angeles. well, it sounds like a neat idea on paper when it was proposed and finally voted on by the voters to put $9 billion of bond money toward that back in 2008. well, for a $33 billion project, right? so they voted for it. actually they delayed the election several times because they didn't want to vote in another bond in an atmosphere that might not have been perfect. so they chose 2008 and some it passed. so thadz 9 -- so that $9 billion that was triggered by the voters, build high speed rail, can't subsidize it, it has to carry its own weight, the price

soon when we figured out three years later, triple, from $33 billion to $98.5 billion. it's projected now to be about $105 billion. so i had a proposal to say, no more spending on this until we actually have a handle on a few important items. they're not even compensating the landowners in the valley so far for the land they're taking by eminent domain. they have all this money, it's such a great idea, and they aren't getting around to even paying the people whose land lies in the way of it. so what's that all about? as well, they're not doing the environmental stuff properly to see that the path is going to be properly handled as far as what might be environmentally sensitive in that area. and thirdly, they don't even have the whole route laid out. they don't know how they're going to get from south of bakersfield through the grape vine, over the grape vine, around the grape vine, into l.a. are they going to build a $25

billion tunnel through there? that might be subject to seismic, who knows. $350 million from stimulus money from the obama era, 2009 money, and they want to get another $2 billion from the so-called infrastructure bill that passed recently. so that's 5dz.5 billion -- $5.5 billion of federal taxpayer money that other states get to pay for. maybe they can lay their hands on $20 billion, $25 billion is the projection, for a project that's going to cost $105 billion. so they're going to be searching for $80 billion more. they've already gotten $5 billion out of the federal government, pretty much. and the whole premise of high speed rail was that private investors can't wait to come in to be part of this project. to help build this fast train from l.a. to san francisco. well, the investors are staying away unless you make guarantees that they'll make money and that's not even allowed in the original proposition that was

passed by the voters, barely. so there really is no end here on this. they will continue to pursue federal money because they don't have it at the local level. we have to put a stop to that. that's why i ran that amendment. this at a time when people need lower price fuel for their cars. that's all driven by policies happening here in washington, d.c., pretty much. you can't blame it all on ukraine and putin. yeah, we import maybe 7%, 8% of our oil, we could have made that up like this with known reserves we have here. of energy we can produce in this country. we don't need russian oil. we don't need putin oil. we don't need foreign oil. we can do it here. we should be doing it. but biden is make us pay the price. with this incredible transition thing he's talking about, right? and it's just hurting the american people. energy feblghts everything -- effects everything. the cost of everything. even the final bit where if you got it, the truck brought it. so -- in the meantime,

california under a bill called ab-5 is putting owner-operated trucks out of business because they're not part of an employment, they don't belong to a union or what have you. and then in washington, d.c., they want to emulate that bill under what's called the p.r.o. act and have it cost everybody in the whole country over that. so the ideas coming out of here are not helping the american people. it's very tone-deaf here in washington, d.c., and in the white house of what the american people are struggling with, with inflation and more spending coming out of this place. so as i mentioned, the army corps of engineers has been b busy, as a tool of the e.p.a., working on something called the waters of the united states. they want to be in charge of every drop of water that hits the ground in the country. even if it hits your roof and runs down your gutter, there's some injures. dick:s that want to control that -- jurisdictions that want to control that. so it's really pretty ominous. especially when you look at my

colleague before me that spoke about the wheat situation in kansas. as well as they're having difficulty with their wheat crop down in texas. well, i have wheat growers up in the north part of my state, that if they can get just enough water, they can get a wheat crop. but they're taking the away wear and flushing it down the river, to help a fish population that it doesn't even work because they're trying to flush some disease, some virus out of it. doesn't even work. and yet they keep doing it anyway. kind of like with the delta in california. flushing water out to save the delta smelt. delta smelt population is basically extinct. they still flush millions of acre feet of water out through that. so california's agriculture suffered. california's economy suffers. those people who are productive are now unemployed, needing assistance instead of being part of the assistance. this is all government regulations coming from d.c. and from california. it also affects low-cost energy,

renewable energy, hydroelectric power. when they take that water away from the waters and the dams and run it off the ocean, that means your electricity prices go up. this all affects the economics of american families. because of regulations, spending here in washington, d.c. as we look at the world food situation, as my colleague from kansas has talked about, if we're not getting a wheat crop out of the midwest, we can't even run a combien up in the base finance they don't get the water for wheat, where are they going to run a combine to help news is ukraine? they're dodging bombs right now. russia has 27 million tons of wheat tied up that they're not letting out of the ports in ukraine. where are we supposed to get the snood hungary's cutting -- food? hungary's cutting off their exports of wheat. we can't grow it in this country. where the hell are people supposed to get food? no one's going to come help us, are they? america's always the one helping everybody else. so we need water for ag.

we need the money they're wasting on high-speed rail -- high speed rail, you could build 21 $5 billion dams for that and grow the food in california that so many people depend on. i'll have an update on that as well, why california food is important, not just in california to growers and workers there, but to people in new york, people in pennsylvania, people all through the midwest. what we grow is important, not just for our local economy, but actually to keep things on the table that people need and demand. instead we would be importing them or not having them at all. so it all starts here in washington, d.c., with misplaced priorities coming out of this administration that are not helping. i have to ask often to the biden administration and even to my colleagues in these two houses here, whose side are you on? i yield back. mr. johnson: i thank my friend. so many important things you highlighted there. mr. speaker, we'll go from california over to the great state of texas next -- oh, well.

i was going to yield to my colleague, mr. roy, he's going to take the next special order hour. but i wonder if you'd have anything you want to throw in there? mr. roy: i appreciate my friend from louisiana recognizing me for a minute. i appreciate his time on the floor. i was in the house judiciary committee and i'll be spending some time of a 30-minute special order here in a second dealing with a lot of the issues that you were just talking about. in particular, dealing with energy. and what i'll be talking about is they break it, you buy it. and that's the reality, what we're dealing with, with our democratic colleagues here in the majority and the administration. energy is the perfect example of that. we're seeing that obviously in texas where we're sitting on a sea of oil and gas that we could be exploring further, producing for the world, driving down co-2, but instead we're not because of the leftist policies of this administration. i'll be getting into that in a minute but i appreciate the gentleman and thank him for

holding this order time on the floor for our colleagues. mr. johnson: i'm grateful for your voice. you were a guest on my podcast last week and we've got a lot of attention on that. people are grateful for your passion on these issues and i hope you keep speaking loudly here on the floor and everywhere and i'm grateful you've gotten a national platform to talk particularly about this immigration crisis which is a whole different subject and you have great insight on that. mr. speaker, i'll wrap up this. i do want to thank my colleagues for joining us today on this special order hour to discuss the harm that the democrat agenda has caused our country and our alternative visions on all these issues. and by way of recap, just quickly, i was taking notes as my colleagues spoke. from across the country, from texas, dr. babin, reminded us that the staggering 77% of americans believe our country's on the wrong track. obviously. because of all this. mr. lamalfa from california just reminded us the excesses and abuses of the federal agencies which are overregulating our

farmers and food producers and they're wasting our type and precious resources -- time and precious resources on these projects. mr. meuser of pennsylvania reminded us that this inflaition is going to cost the average -- inflation is going to cost the average american family this year an extra $6,000 in the cost of living. mr. roe of tennessee reminded us about that skyrocketing inflation rate, it's obviously the result of the biden policies and the administration's backward approach to all this. but they even now want to remove and eliminate the hyde amendment so that taxpayers have to fund abortions. mr. good of virginia reminded us p that -- us about that border catastrophe and the numbers that are staggering. three million encounters at the border. 800,000 gotaways that we can't even account for. and that's just the numbers that the d.h.s. admits to. so we know it's higher. he talked about the energy policy disaster causing pain to every hardworking american family as well. finally, mr. mann of tennessee

talked about how the inflation crisis has real-world consequences for our farmers in the wheat state and everywhere else. mr. speaker, we could go on and on all night. i'll conclude our special order hour but this is just a sampling of all the many crises that have been created by the biden administration and washington democrats in charge of this institution. we cannot wait to begin to turn this around after the november election. with that, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: under the speaker's announced policy of january 4, 2021, the chair recognizes the gentleman from texas, mr. roy, for 30 minutes. mr. roy: i appreciate the speaker, appreciate the time here on the floor. i appreciate, as i said a minute ago, my friend from louisiana, representative johnson, for his steadfast defense of the constitution of the united states, his willingness to stand up for all the important values, and being a voice for this body for the republican conference. and where we want to take this country. what we know the american people want us to do. and to stand to thwart the

absurd policies of the democrat majority who don't give a wit about the people they're rolling over in order to placate their radical leftist policies, whether it's energy or open borders, and i appreciate the gentleman from louisiana and his efforts. i'm here to talk about my democratic colleagues and the extent to which the american people need to understand they break it, you buy it. that's the reality of what's that's the reality of what's happening. my democratic colleagues are breaking, breaking this country, breaking up your family, breaking up our secure border, breaking up our military, breaking up our court system, the rule of law, breaking up our police. our law enforcement community. breaking up our economy. breaking the strength of the american dollar. they're breaking our position in the world. and they're breaking this body, the people's house.

and it's high time it stopped. we can only hope that in november we get a change so we can stop it and the message to my republican colleagues is, we better stop it. what's happening in the so-called people's house cannot be tolerated any longer. they break it, this body, the leadership of this country, they break it. you buy it. in reverse, i would say america is great. washington is broken. they're breaking it every day and as a result they're breaking this great country that our forefathers fought so hard to give to us and to our children and grandchildren. you cannot defend the policies of the democratic majority. it's impossible to do. and in fact if you set out to harm the united states of america, i would defy someone to demonstrate to me how you could do better than my democratic

colleagues are doing on a daily basis, ripping apart the constitution, ripping apart the shreds of the flag, ripping apart the people of this country, dividing us, dividing us by race. dividing us by income. dwiegd us by our adherence to the constitution or devotion to the border, devotion to the rule of law. that's what's happening on a daily basis and it's purposeful. let's be perfectly clear that it's purposeful. the reason my democratic colleagues focus so intently on january 6 is they want to device us -- divide us. the reason they want to have race-based policies throughout our government is they want to divide us. the reason they want to make the border being supposedly about not liking bran people is they want to divide us, never mind that south texas is full of brown people sick of wide open orders empowering cartels. that's the reality of what's going on in this chamber, in the senate, and the other end of pennsylvania avenue. let's focus on the border for a minute.

broken. wide open. abused by cartels. exploited by terrorists. exploited by gang members. criminals coming into our country. killing american citizens. fentanyl pouring into our communities. 107,000 dead americans. 850,000 known gotaways pouring in between the ports of entry because our border patrol are overwhelmed with not only no support from this administration but the purposeful attack by the secretary of homeland security, lying about the good men and women of border patrol saying that they whipped people that they didn't and then hiding behind some report when they give them an administrative punishment. that is your leadership, ladies and gentlemen. they are breaking and you have to buy it. they're leaving our border wide open. and american citizens are dying. let me repeat that. they are leaving our border wide open, broken, and the american people are dying. thousands upon thousands of

americans, dieing from fentanyl pouring into our communities. pushed by china, exploited by cartels. left to be able to come into our country because democrats do not care about securing the border and more importantly, my democratic colleagues are perfectly fine purposely leaving our border wide open. it's purposeful. it's purposeful. they are breaking it. and you're going to have to buy it. how about our defense. our defense department is being broken. on a daily basis. by my colleagues on this side of the aisle and the other chamber and particularly this administration. shoving into the department of defense a radical woke ideology, radical woke programs, policies focused on diversity and equity and inclusion. all of the things that they cloak with a critical race theory to destroy and break apart the institution of our

defense. it's purposeful. vaccine mandates, forcing, 60,000 guardsmen to be on the chopping block to lose their entire career. it is purposeful. they're breaking it. they're breaking that military you love. they're breaking that department of defense that needs to be there on that wall defending us. they're breaking it. they're breaking it by tucking tail and running out of afghanistan with $85 billion of equipment there and 12 or 13 dead service members and no accountability. no accountabilitier if brass at the pentagon, no accountability so far at the white house. for tucking tail and run. running. they're breaking our defense department. you talk to the service members who are in my office, coming in in tears because they're about to lose their entire career because they choose not to take a politicized vaccine, oh, by the way, by another broken governmental agency, or

agencies, our whole public health system. being radicalized by my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. to strike fear in the hearts of the american people. to watch them push aside and brush under the rug gain of function research and all we see unfolding in china and the but hand institute of -- and the wuhan institute of virology. all we know about american funding tied to that. all we know about the absurdity of locking down schools, shutting down our schools so our kids were stuck in the corner not able to go to school. the damage it has done to our kids. the mental health issues. destroying the education of our young. all chasing the teachers' unions. we've seen the mandatory -- or efforts at mandatory vaccine, thankfully partially struck aside but many still in place. breaking the back of the people's trust in their public health. breaking the back of the

people's ability to serve in the military and defend this country. breaking the back of people being able to be federal public servants working for border patrol or other federal agencies. why? because of fealty to anthony fauci being the great wizard of public health while he poses for magazine covers and throws out pitches at baseball games. meanwhile, your defense is broken, your public health is broken, and you're going to have to buy it. how about crime on the streets of the united states of america. how about the 12 democrat-run cities that have called for defunding their police and have seen skyrocketing crime enveloping the cities. the business owner i spoke to today in baltimore who says he has to shut down his franchise because of crime, rampant in baltimore. austin, texas, which cut its police by a third and have seen homicides skyrocket from 59 to 89, have seen 911 calls

unanswered. drug trafficking increasing. taking streets -- taking police off the streets. in austin, texas. we've seen 50 of the biggest urban areas, see a 5% decrease in their police budgets while my colleagues on the other side of the aisle say they're doing no such thing. but my friend mr. johnson rattled off quote after quote after quote in the house judiciary committee for my colleagues calling for defunding the police. of course it's an attack on our police. they're breaking our police departments. breaking the back of our men and women in blue and leaving our streets exposed to lawlessness and danger. and it's purposeful. how about energy. could you take a more ridiculous position than to take the strength of national security, of having abundant oil and gas, the ability to lead on nuclear,

and instead chase unicorn energy policies of nothing but solar and wind so that on a cloudless, windless day -- or cloudy, windless day you sit back and watch your energy plummet and your grid weaken. what kind of a country's leadership does that to its people? i'd say the kind that want to break it. i'd say the kind that want to chase the fairy tales and the unicorn energy policies this administration wants to pursue. we can have nuclear power. doesn't create any carbon dioxide. do my colleagues on the other side want to do that? no because this is about fear. this is about breaking. american energy. this is about breaking the back of it. so you can get on your private plane and fly to davos and fit in with the western europeans and how great they are while they're burning wood to heat their homes. we had the greatest national security asset you could possibly imagine, which was full

and complete energy independence, and we're completely flushing it down the toilet. to break it. and to break it purposefully. and we dent have to do it. we have abundant energy, abundant clean burning natural gas we could export to other countries as we were doing. driving down carbon dioxide. we could be producing my clear pa tillcis across this country with zero co-2 production. but we're not. instead, we're chasing literally, we're tilting at windmills. dotting the landscape with windmills. we had a couple of weeks ago in texas where we had 8% of the wind capacity available in our grid. absolutely astounding what we're doing to the energy of the united states of america. inflation. i can't even get all this. in the absurd policies of democrats. i've already covered border. could go further. already talked about defense,

could go further. didn't even get into ukraine, the lack of brief, the $56 million we just dumped into ukraine with zero indication of a strategy of where we're going to do, while we expand nato with zero indication of how that will impact article 5 and an 800 mile border and whether nato will uphold its ender of the bargain when we fund most of nato. i talked about crime, didn't get into every aspect of it. didn't get into every aspect of energy. now inflation. the wisdom of this administration coming in and dumping $1.9 trillion, i don't remember what the name of that ridiculous bill was but it was garbage. and it's now driving up the cost of goods and services for you, the american people. they're breaking it. they're breaking your jobs. they're breaking your income. they're breaking your ability to buy goods and services. and you're literally going to have to buy it and you're going to have to pay a lot for it. because they're spending money we don't have, they're printing money, throwing it out in the

economy, driving up the prices of goods while they're simultaneously restricting the act for us to develop energy to have abundant energy that you can afford. you like $4.50 gasoline? guess what, your democratic leadership just defended that as being great. in a rules committee debate this week, when i sat in that room, debating the rules, literally the democratic rules committee was talking about how great it is that the price of oil has come down, quote-unquote. they about the price of copper going down. i've spent a lot of money on copper to wire my home. it's expensive as heck. it's now locked up in changes. do you know what the price of copper going down means? heading into reages. -- recession. that's the reality of what we are facing. that's the truth. our economy is getting ripped to shreds, prist of goods and services are going up.

and it's purposeful. spending money we don't have. how can you justify spending $2 trillion, printing that money, and dumping it out there to drive up the price of goods and services while cutting off the production of oil and gas, not developing nuclear, increasing the price of gasoline, increasing the price of energy in your homes. it can only be purposeful. they're breaking it. they want to break it. is they can live in unicorn land. but you're going to have to buy it and it's going to be expensive. how about the state of the rule of law. how about the state of the family. how about the state of marriage. just yesterday on this floor, just yesterday on this floor, we passed a law to force recognition by one state of another state's marriage but by thereby doing that, for the first time i think this body

certainly members on this side, supporting the redefinition of marriage which was manufactured by the 2015 supreme court decision, manufactured and forced upon the states, a redefinition of marriage. now you see the wailing and gnashing of teeth because this court dared to say that roe vs. wade was bad law and that we should defer to the states in the protection of life and the recognition that that is the appropriate law around the constitution. and lastly, i would point out, we're talking about breaking it, this body is the best example of my democratic colleagues not giving a whit about you the people, rolling over and destroying the people's house. destroying this institution.

i have not been able to offer an amendment on the floor of this body. can't do it. got to go to rules, beg for crumbs. they drive through so-called suspension of the rules bills. we get them often hour, at most a day or two, before they're on the floor, being asked to be voice voted. if we don't have a group of us on the floor monitoring those bill they will go through without a vote. they don't care. they don't care because voting doesn't matter. as evidenced by proxy voting. forcing a new rule that says you can turn your voting card, that you the voters gave to representatives, and give that to another member of congress, upending the constitutional order which requires presence, a quorum, physical presence, debait, that is what the constitution con tell -- debate, that is what the constitution contemplates. and it is my democratic colleagues who for the first time in history upended our

requirement that we be present in the body of the house of representatives to do our job. blowing apart, blowing apart this people's house. and i will note, as i often do, that i'm not staying -- saying that everybody on this side of the aisle has clean hands on all of these points. a lot of republicans are taking advantage of the proxy voting that my democratic colleagues created for first time in history. they should not, i'll say that to every member, i don't care if they're freedom caucus members or anyone in between, i will not back away from saying proxy vote something not only unconstitutional, it's wrong and it's destroying this body. forced magnitomers in this false name of security. masked being forced upon members of congress on the floor of the house. which have now been brushed aside because, i guess, anthony fauci or somebody decreed that

somehow it's now safe to walk around without masks. until they say it's not safe. i will yield to my friend from virginia here in one second. i just want to say in conclusion to this part, i don't want to engage with my friend, my democratic colleagues, unfortunately with a little bit of help from a few of my republican colleagues on occasion, are breaking this country, they are breaking this body, they are breaking our constitution and it is purposeful. there are no other words to say what's happening at our border but that it's purposeful. there's no other words to say of what's happening on our streets and law enforcement, is that it's purposeful. our energy policies are purposeful. there's nothing else you could say about the spending and the inflation than that it's purposeful. the attack on the constitution of marriage, the breakdown of the family, the targeting and the policies of against life, it is purmful. the fact that we are -- purposeful. the fact that we are destroying this body with proxy voting, it's purposeful.

the fact that we're destroying the defense department and the very core values of our men and women in military with their woke policies, with their vax mandates, irrespective of what that does to defense, it's purposeful. and it's wrong. and i would just challenge my republican colleagues that we better come in if the american people give us power in november and do the right thing to protect this country and stop breaking it. because the american people are having to buy it. with that, i yield to my friend from virginia. >> thank you. i had a constituent say to me from bedford county just outside lynchburg where i live, nothing this president and this majority in congress is doing makes sense unless they hate the country. nothing they're doing makes sense unless they hate the country. what would you do differently over the last year and a half, if it was your purpose, your desire, your intention to ruin the country? mr. good: maybe you would

undermine police. maybe you would reduce funding for police. maybe you would stop arresting violent criminals. maybe you would stop prosecuting violent crimes. maybe you would allow violent criminals to have no-cash bail. maybe we release violent criminals from our prisons. and, you know what, all of those things happening, the democrats seem surprised that crime has went up across the country. violent crime is up 30% in the last year across the country. american citizens ton recognizable, people don't -- unrecognizable -- cities unrecognizable, people don't want to go there anymore because of these policies. mistake people don't want four million illegal aliens coming into the country in the past year and a half. maybe when we have a shortage of funding to take care of americans, to do things that we'd like to do to take care of our veterans, to take care of those most in need, to help our farmers, to help hardworking americans, maybe give them a little bit of their resources back, to reduce the regulations and the oppression upon them, maybe we don't need to bring in

four million illegal aliens in a year and a half, 10,000 a day now, the average is, give them free social services, free health care, free education, free travel, with no requirement to even appear in court. maybe the american people want their border secure. maybe the american people don't want massive inflation, 40-year record inflation, caused primarily by the massive spending, the reckless spending and then the energy policies. think about where we might be if this democrat majority had gotten their $6 trillion build back better bill through congress. $20,000 per american citizen. they like to say sometimes, oh, some of this stuff's popular in polls. well, people want this. $6 trillion is what they've tried to spend. and they're still trying to back door it in over these remaining months that they have power.

how would it poll, do you think, if we said, american citizen, do you want this so-called benefit, this so-called perk, what have you, but your share of the cost is $20,000? so a family of three, your share is $60,000. how many would vote for these policies? not to mention what they're doing on energy by design, on purpose. the dishonest attack on the fossil fuel industry. the dishonest narrative that we are not the cleanest large energy producer in the world. the damage that's been done to the commercial the damage that's been done to the way that the american people live their lives. and what are they doing? they're bragging about the pain that they're causing. the more pain, the better, they're saying. that's what the president has said. hey, we're halfway through a transition. if we could just get through to the other side, it's going to be so much better. you know, as you said, in candyland and unicornland, we're going to have all these jobs and all this prosperity because we

went through all this pain. but the fact is, the fossil fuel industry has been used to bring more prosperity to third world countries than any other development in history. in industrial history. this assault on our freedoms, our economic freedoms, our health care freedoms, as you mentioned, where it's the masks or vaccines, our individual freedoms with the second amendment assault, this body is going to try to pass two more bills to take away and restrict second amendment rights. that's going to happen in this house, we're told. the continued assault on the second amendment right, you know, i don't do this very often but i have quotes from the founders as it relates to the second amendment right. and as i was looking for quotes, know, i couldn't find anything that talked about -- that the people could keep and bear arms so they could target -- bare arms so they could target practice. that they could keep arms for

sporting purposes. these quotes i have from the founders explaining why they wrote into the constitution the second amendment as they did was to ensure we remain free. freedom has a cost. most of the world does not live free to the extent that we still live free, as you often enunciate. you know, whether the majority of this congress liked it or not, we have a constitution. i happen to like it. i know you do as well. and the framers in their wisdom made it possible to change the constitution. but they made it difficult by design. they said, hey, if you want to change the constitution, you've got to have soup mar jotters of both houses -- super majorities of both houses. you have to have super majority of the states. legislatures. in order to bring transformational change to the country to amend the constitution. but instead they want to undermine the constitution, undermine our freedoms and attack the rights guaranteed to

americans our constitution. mr. roy: i ask the chair how much time we have left. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has five minutes remaining. mr. roy: i thank the speaker. i would just ask to my friend from virginia, a great quote from thomas jefferson, he knows i went to the university of virginia, the strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep arms is as a last resort to protect themselves against tyranny in government. that is the purpose of the second amendment. and that is what we know. and i would note in this context, and i'll yield another couple minutes to the gentleman if he wants it, we're talking about the response to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, they break our border purposefully, and then they want us to fix it with amnesty or with some policies to say that texas has to just accept -- and i hear the mayor of new york is

all aghast that people are being dropped off in new york. we need federal government help to deal with it. welcome to the party, pal. this is what life's like in south texas every single day. they break it. they break the border and they want you, the american people, to have to carry the water. they break the defense department, drive recruiting down to 40%, then they put in language to draft our daughters. all in the name solve called equity and equality. they break our criminal justice system, they break the backs of our law enforcement community, then they say, we're going to take your guns, your ability to defend yourself. they break the energy system in our country. then they say, just go buy a tesla. what's wrong with you? mr. good: $70,000. mr. roy: yeah, what's wrong with you, go buy a tesla. you can plug in. drive to west texas, 300 miles, don't worry about it. stop in eaton, texas, where no doubt they have a charging station, and spend $70,000 for the pleasure.

they break the back of the economy, drive up inflation, and they they say, suck it up, go buy yourself expensive chicken and riles. they break the back of this body, this institution, and they ignore their colleagues when they're colleagues are saying, the chickens are going to come home to roost. that's the reality of what we're dealing with. a purposeful breaking the back of this country and the tearing apart of the threads that hold us together. i'm going to just say it here on the floor, if we don't start respecting federalism, the ability to agree to disagree, then this country is doomed. it will break apart under its own weight and it will be my colleagues on the other side of the aisle that amass the weight that will break the back and that is where we're headed if we don't start respecting the ability of individuals in this country to agree to disagree about texans to be texans,

californians to be californians under our core principles, but stop shredding our ability to disagree. stop breaking this country and forcing the american people to buy it. and i yield the balance of my time to the gentleman from virginia. mr. good: well said to the gentleman from texas. their solution, this president's solution this majority's solution to the economic wreckage they have created is to spend more money. and you just ask yourself, you're baffled, is it malicious intent? and they recognize the harm that they're doing and how they're causing the harp and they're doing -- harm and they're doing it by design and they're doing it on purpose, or are they that economically illiterator and they really are -- illiterate and they really are clueless? because you have the record inflation, 40-year high inflation, which essentially means every american is working for one month free. this year. one year, one month out of the year they're essentially not getting paid, they lost

purchasing power because of inflation. what is their answer to that? well, if we could just spend more money, if we could just get more of our agenda passed and spend trillions of dollars more, then that will help the problem rather than make it worse. because like the person who says, hey, i'm trying to lose weight, and they they would say, well, the solution is to eat more. that is the solution that they propose. to do more harm and you wonder, is it that illiterate, that ignorant, or is it willful and devious and malicious? i yield back. mr. roy: i thank the gentleman from virginia. i think our time has expired and appreciate the speaker and the staff here tonight. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. members are reminded to address their remarks to the chair and not to a perceived viewing audience.

under the speaker's announced policy of january 4, 2021, the chair recognizes the gentleman from virginia, mr. good, for 30 minutes. mr. good: thank you, mr. speaker. mr. speaker, the second amendment in our constitution is the amendment that guarantees or ensures all the other freedoms that we hold dear in this

country. the right to defend one's self is a god-given right but we are unique among the nations of the world, the nations of the world that this this -- that that right is protected to us, for us, and enshrined in our constitution based on the wisdom of the founders. there's a mechanism for changing the constitution but it's difficult. and yet what this body wants to do is to find ways to do what the constitution clearly says, which is that the congress has absolutely no constitutional authority to restrict the rights of law-abiding citizens to keep and bear arms. i'm going to read a few quotes from the founders from about 250 years ago. alexander hamilton said, and the reason why we go back to the founders is to understand what they intended with the constitution. we have the federal itself papers, of course, and then other writings by the founders. alexander hamilton said, the

besty we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed. samuel adams said, the constitution shall never be construed to authorize congress to infringe or to prevent the people of the united states who are peaceful -- peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. james madison, the first congressman from my fifth district, and our fourth president, said the constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, still true today, where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. noah webster said before a standing army can cruel -- can rule, the people must be disarmed as they are in almost every kingdom in europe. a military force at the command of congress can execute no laws

but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional. for they will possess the power to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive. thomas jefferson. from my home district in virginia. from where mr. -- the gentleman from texas went to school. said what country can preserve its liberties if it's rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance. let them take arms. thomas jefferson also said, no free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. back to james madison. the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. a well-regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.

george mason said, to disarm the people, that was the best and most effectule way to enslave them. patrick henry said, are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? if our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety or equal safety to us than our own hands? samuel adams said the constitution that will sever -- shall never be construed to authorize congress to prevent the people of the united states who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms. thomas payne -- paine -- arms discourage and keep the invader and plannederer in awe and preserve order in the world. mischief would ensue were the lew-abiding deprived of the use of them. patrick henry also said, let

me -- where and when did freedom exist when the sword and the purse were given up from the people. we're doing that right here in this body. we're taking the sword and the purse away from the people. he said, unless a miracle in human affairs interposed no nation ever retained its liberty after the los of the sword and the purse. the great object is that every man be armed. everyone who is able may have a gun. and final quote, from thomas jefferson, then i'll defer to the gentleman from south carolina. laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assail cey lants. they serve rather to encourage rather than to prevent hods for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man. i yield to the gentleman from

south carolina. >> i want to yield a minute to congressman chip roy. mr. roy: i appreciate that. i was on the judiciary committee to defend from the attacks being levied by my democratic colleague, as we speak. i would add one thing to what the gentleman just eloquently put out. the understanding for the american people, that when this nation was funned, we were dealing with debate about what the structure of government should look like. those what were suspicious of consolidating power, the anti-federalists, were raising questions. james madison, a virginian, was making points through the "federalist papers" and he said in response to some critiques, all the other checks and balances will always prevent tyranny but should tyranny every triumph, the constitution provides a mechanism to restore constitutional order. quote, he said, besides the advantage of being armed over the people -- which the americans possess over the people of other neigh, the existence of subordinate

government, state government, to which the people are attached, state and local governments and by which militia officers are appointed, because it meant a well-ordered militia, not regulated the way we talk about it, forms a barrier against the interprideses of ambition more insurmountable than any which a civil form of government can admit of. the second amendment does not create a right of revolution against tyranny that inherent right is yawn versal. the second amendment provides the tools and the power for the people to stand afford tyranny. >> thank you for that. let me give you a live example of what happens with a well-armed militia, a well-armed, the purpose of the second amendment for the citizens of america to bear arms. this past sunday, a deranged

gunman opened fire in a food court of a shopping mall in greenwood, indiana, which is a suburb of indianapolis. police say this deranged gunman fired 24 rounds within two minutes killing three and injuring two others. mr. norman: nearby was a young man, elisjah dicken, a young man who took quick action to stop the gunman. he was legally armed, carrying his own weapon under indiana's constitutional carry laws. thank god for this young man. in summarizing his response, the greenwood chief of police said, quote, i will say his actions were nothing short of heroic. he engaged the gunman from quite a distance with a handgun. end quote. the police chief went on to say, he was, quote, very tactically sound as he moved in to close on the suspect and when -- was also monitoring for people to exit

behind him. he has had no police experience, no training, no military background. end of quote. what a true hero. he was simply going about his businessed at the mall when the unthinkable happened. it's hard to imagine how we might react in that situation but he was equipped and he was prepared and he had courage to confront that sick individual who was determined to kill others. elisjah would not have been able to do so if the liberals that want to take away our second amendment rights had their way with this so-called gun control. to my democratic friends who are determined to restrict our second amendment rights, i ask you this. how many more people might have died last sunday in greenwood, indiana, if you had had your way? how many more people would have been slaughtered if he didn't have the ability to exercise his constitutional rights? thankfully, we will never know

the answer to that question. americans deserve the right to protect themselves and others when their lives are in severe danger. that's why it's so critical to strongly defend our second amendment rights against the anti-gun left that is so intent to demoralize our second amendment and our constitution. i yield back. >> ronald reagan, to paraphrase, said freedom is only one generation away from extings and it must be fought and preserved from one generation to the next and no nation having lost its free tom inist hi -- in history has r regained it. you think about how in the past year and a half we have seen our most basic, most essential freedoms trampled upon by those who would also trample upon our second amendment rights. they have moved to restrict our own health care decisions about whether or not we have to take a vaccine we may not want or need. mr. good: they restricted our ability to travel and to move to where we want to go, whether or not we can assemble, whether or not we can worship, whrosh we

can go to work, whether or not we can operate a business and they want to trample upon our rights to defend ourselves. and with that, i yield to the gentleman from north carolina, mr. cawthorn. mr. cawthorn: thank you. madam speaker, 40 yards. 10 rounds. one man. countless lives saved. i speak today to acknowledge a new american hero. just two weeks after indiana passed a constitutional carry provision, one man stood tall in the face of imminent death, protecting his loved ones and his community from evil. elisjah dicken's actions are not just to be applauded in the media but ought to be used as a blue fingerprint for citizens who legally carry nationwide. there's strong evidence that the best defense an american can possess a sidearm and the know-how to use it. speaker, law-abiding citizens use firearms to defend themselves against criminals as many as 2.5 million times a year, about 650,000 times a day.

this means they're use 80 times more often to protect the lives of honest citizens than to take lives. moreover, citizens shoot and kill at least twice as many criminals as police do every year. as was the case in greenwood. the analysis is clear. law-abiding, gun-toting americans are the best line of defense against random acts of mass violence. make no mistake, congress' gun control lobby would have rather take then handgun from elisjah's hand and replaced it with blood-soaked corpses of many innocents in indiana. mr. speaker, i speak for many americans when i say we will carry. we will protect ourselves. we will neutralize threats to our safety and security. we don't need you to defend us. stop coming for our security. stop coming for our constitutionally protected rights. retire to a nice seaside estate protected by armed guards and let red-blooded freedom loving americans conceal carry and when

necessary kill those who threaten our lives. remember, you are your own first responder. thank you. mr. good: thank you to the gentleman from north carolina. mr. speaker, can you confirm how much time we have remaining? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman has 17 minutes remaining. mr. good: thank you, sir. with that, i yield to the gentlelady, my good friend from georgia. mrs. greene: thank you so much, mr. good thank you for letting us have this time together. chairman perry, mr. cawthorn, mr. good, mr. norman. i'm honored to stand here with you all to stand in defense of our second amendment rights and i say this not only as a member of congress but i say this as a woman and i say this as a mother. and i say this also as an adult that knows what it's like when my school was held hostage by another student with a gun, a very upset student. it's not the guns that are the

issue. it's the severe mental illness and the breakdown in america with our morals and our values and this severe divide among all of us as americans and i want to add to this, this is a story i haven't been able to share with my good colleagues here, but just this weekend, now that i'm a member of congress, you know, many of us, we get a lot of death threats, but one of my family members received a voice mail on their personal cell phone from a man saying very, very bad things about me and then saying this is what i'm going to do to her, and he cooked a gun and shot it several times. this is the type of threats i get and it came with the threat of a gun. but i tell you this as a woman and a gun owner, i need to be able to have any kind of gun that i want to own to defend myself, to defend my family, to defend my home.

gd forbid if someone chose to do something to me. and you see here's the issue. it doesn't matter how many gun control laws we put in place, it doesn't matter how many types of guns that are banned. the criminals and the people who intend to do harm to others, those that would murder someone even if they could murder them with their bare hands, they're still going to do it. and they're not going to be the ones that hand over their guns to the government. oh, no. they're going to be keeping their guns so they can continue breaking the law. we have guns coming across our border every single day illegally. we have terrorists that have been caught at our border. and then we have a lot of gotaways and we don't know how many of those are terrorist, what kind of criminals, how much human trafficking, how much child trafficking is happening down there. crime is up in every single city and county and small town across america. americans need their guns.

and it's -- there should not be a ban on assault weapons because it's not about the gun or the weapon. it's about what is inside someone's human heart. what we have to do is we have to stand in defense and protect our second amendment. because it's the most important freedom that we have. if we if we lose it in the name of the so-called issues and where they are pointing at what is a tool, a gun is a tool. the gun doesn't get up and kill people on its own, it's the people that do it. and take away the guns from the legal gun owners, the criminals are left with the guns and then you want to know what happens? even if those guns are gone, they will commit murder and use something else. it's about election. that's why they are trying to ban assault weapons, because inflation is out of control, crime is out of control, gas prices are difficult to afford

and our president is moving into some sort of clean energy that will fail america. this isn't what we need to do. and i'm happy that people stand here in defense of people's gun rights and i yield back to chairman perry. mr. perry: i do yield to the chairman from freedom caucus, mr. scott perry. mr. perry: i thank mr. good from the state of virginia for hosting this special order and oftentimes i think that we make this partisan. republicans are seen or characterized as unempathetic, uncaring in the face of so many tragedies. it couldn't be further from the truth. our hearts break like everyone else's. but we recognize that in this imperfect union that seems to be

more imperfect every single day that the right to defend one self is enshrined in the founding documents. the founding documents that we take an oath to uphold and defend. we don't dismiss that. we understand that unform there are evil people in the world and that this right exists given to us by god and outlined in our constitution so we can defend ourselves from any attacker because we have the god-given right of liberty and life and we have that. we seek some kind of protection for ourselves that also protects our god-given rights, but doesn't allow the criminals to prevail upon us in our homes and business and on the streets. right now, while americans are suffering the worst cost of living in 40 years, i know the administration doesn't want to talk about it, right now, while

violent crime up 30%, an unprecedented not told to us by scott perry but by our f.b.i. unprecedented rise in violent crime. right now, right down the hall, instead of dealing with the rise in crime and d.a. are letting criminals out on the street and not dealing with the issue that millions are flowing across our board with no regard to american laws coming across our border, notwithstanding the fact that some of the people that people in the highest levels bail out violent criminals and paid for their bail to then be on the street and assault their neighbors. and down the hall, as we sme, our colleagues on the left are trying to reinstitute the assault weapon ban, that they

know since 1994 when it was stated then did absolutely nothing, did absolutely nothing to solve this problem, because they don't care about crime. they don't care at all. we are seen as unempathetic. every city across the country is like a war zone. you would be safer in the war zone. you would be safer in a war zone than downtown chicago, st. louis, detroit, new orleans. but they are down the hall working on a solution that doesn't fix anything, mr. good. it doesn't fix a thing, it takes our rights away and doesn't solve anything. we are here because we believe that americans have the right to be free and safe in their homes and we are here as freedom caucus members to say we do stand with the constitution and believe in our oath and we think we can do both and defend

ourselves and stop most criminals violent activities. but there have to be consequences and what you are seeing right now across the country are the consequences of not holding people accountable. violent criminals being let out on the street over and over and over again and the message being sent by this administration and colleagues on the other side of the aisle, it's ok. it is ok to commit any crime you want. there was a gentleman in new york, he was attacked and defended himself and the attacker's life was taken and what did the district attorney do? he charged the man who defended himself with murder. it's ok to commit your crimes. mr. speaker, it is not ok and this solution is not going to solve anything except disarming law-abiding citizens.

the criminals that are willing to disregard the law and use the weapon to kill somebody are go to go disregard the law and maintain that weapon when you tell our law-abiding citizens they must turn theirs in. mr. speaker, this cannot stand. we are here today to say no matter what happens down the hall and what vote they bring out of that committee to disarm america, we will oppose it with every fiber of our being. we will oppose it. and even if we lose on this round, in six months when we win the majority around here, if they were to be successful in imposing this confiscation on american citizens and the confiscation of not only the rights to life and self-defense that we will reinstate them. i would yield whatever balance to the good gentleman nor

virginia and i thank him for carrying the load for us. mr. good: have you ever been asked about the media of an police officer killed in the line of duty? mr. perry: they ask what we are going to get that killer. mr. good: i'm never asked about the police officers who are shot in america's largest cities, i am never asked about the media about that or the hundreds of shootings that take place in america every weekends these war zones that are under democrat control. these are cities controlled by democrats and policies carried to their conclusion and what they are trying to do that has been in place in these major cities, baltimore, detroit, chicago, st. louis and on and on, new orleans and that's where most of the crime is. that's where most of the

shootings take place and don't care. do they want to harden our schools and do what is necessary to keep our kids safe. i have been an advocate in allowing armed personnel within the school system who are trained and want to carry and conceal and teachers and staff to be armed in their schools and keep everyone safe. we all know the truth and mr. norman mentioned this, the best response to a bad guy is a good guy with a gun. more law-abiding citizens as the founders recognized 250 years ago when we didn't have this violent crime in america's largest cities. if the second amendment is not safe, than no other right is safe. the reason it comes right after that first amendment guarantee to free speech, free assembly,

free woreshipship is that to keep us safe and look around the world and look at the nation of ukraine. ukraine would be a different place today if the citizens were armed and permitted to be armed the way we are in this country. taiwan would be safer from the threat of its large enemy on its border if the citizens were armed. and the founders recognize that not only do we possess a god-given but also that we would be unique among the nations in the world and protecting that right and saying that congress has no authority to infringe on that right for law-abiding and i yield back to the sit friend from pennsylvania. mr. perry: that's our duty here. people think that the federal government is maybe supposed to

provide so many things. and every one of us have different visitors come in and ask us what the federal government can provide for them. and unfortunately, i think many of our citizens don't know it is to provide us with the rights that have been given to us by god. and right down the hall, it's not about making sure we maintain our rights to defend ourselves, maintain the rights that everybody in that room swore an oath in the constitution to uphold and defend it, they are looking to strip the very people that are law abiding and people that would follow the law and purchase the weapon legally and file the paperwork and do everything that is required in those states, those are the people that they wish to disarm. they are not in there talking about stopping criminals, they are talking about stopping

law-abiding citizens trying to defend themselves when someone breaks into their home or store or on the street or heaven forbid our citizens travel to one of these cities. i represent a company called starbucks. their c.e.o. is closing stores all across the midwest or the northwest of our country because of safety. people want to go to starbucks. they can't. because it's not going to be there anymore, not because of sales but because of safety. if that's not a sign of a sickness and c.e.o. of starbuckt he thinks the answer is an assault weapons ban, but i never heard it is held up by an assault weapon. people are killed in major

cities, whether it is with a knife or a handgun, but it's the people that do it. great britain banned handguns and now considering banning knives. our country has a sickness and empathetic to it and sympathetic. but taking the tool away doesn't address the sickness and our colleagues on the other side of the aisle are focused on the firearm that they can't even see past the fact that they are disavowing their oath to the constitution. mr. good: thank you, mr. perry. the constitution first 10 amendments were intended to protect the individual, the people from the government. the constitution protects the individual, the minority from the tyranny of the majority. there is a reason why we are not a democracy but a representative republic based on the rule of

law and based on the constitution that would ensure we remain free and ensure we protect the rights of the individual and number one job that we have gotten so far away from in this body is to keep us safe and secure and part of that is to ensure our rights are safe and secure and that includes the right to defend ourselves. mr. perry: the right to defend ourselves. mr. good and i and our colleagues, we haven't voted to defund the police. here's what we know, we smort fully law enforcement. when someone breaks into your home and pick up your phone, it will take a certain amount of time unless law enforcement is sitting out in your driveway and do something about it at that moment. and what our colleagues on the other side right now are telling us is no, you aren't going to have the opportunity or any

ability to do anything about it. you can use harsh language and throw the lamp that is on your bedstand in self-defense but doesn't stop the assailant's bullets. mr. speaker, we deserve, because we have earned the right to defend ourselves. we live in america and we have a constitution that we live under and outlines our rights that is ordained by the good lord above and can't have this congress. and i yield to the gentleman from virginia. mr. good: we yield back pursuant to section 1 of house resolution 1230, the